Bladerunner-DVD

Eliot

Eliot

Eliot

Soldato
Joined
29 Mar 2005
Posts
5,792
Is this ever goin to happen (yes i know its been done but it cost 40 quid and is low quality because it came out very early) isnt there some kinda legal issues or something? I want it bad.
 
"And finally, here's a bit of news that's going to get a lot of you excited (and I made a point to specifically ask about this title, believe me)... Ridley Scott's Blade Runner (1982) is currently on track for release as a multi-disc special edition in time for its 25th anniversary in 2007. The release is far from certain (as usual, there's a lot more that I can't post about this title yet - think of the old saying, "Loose lips sink ships"), but Warner says that work is proceeding, most of the key players are involved and things are "looking good" for release next year. We'll see."

http://www.brmovie.com/BR_Special_Edition.htm
 
Yup - it's on my list though.

I need a good copy of Bladerunner - got the DVD and Laserdisc but the quality of both is dubious... :(

Simon/~Flibster
 
ElvisFan said:
Me too.
Click to expand...

From linked article...

In September, Warner will release a "restored and remastered" version of the film, including the 1992 "director's cut". After four months, this limited release will be deleted and replaced by an all-singing, all-dancing definitive DVD onto which will be packed the aforementioned "final cut", plus the "director's cut", plus "the original theatrical cut, the expanded international theatrical cut", according to Reuters.
Click to expand...
 
What is it with people and "Originals".
Do people feel feel that when something is remade, even as the director wants but couldn't at the time due to technology constrainsts or similar that they are somehow doing it as a personal attack on you?

I am a massive Bladerunner fan.
From the minute I saw the film it has been my favourite film of all time and now, many, many years later it is still my favourite film of all time.
I'm 30 now and even if you only say I've had 15 years of serious film watching there are a lot of films over those 15 years to rival Bladerunner.

I don't understand how any true fan of the film can accept the two flaws that appear in the "Original Cut".
How the removal of the whole dream sequence that actually opens up the question "Was Deckard a Rep?" makes the film any better.
If you are a fan of the original film there is no "Deckard=Rep" question, the film never asks us it.
And then the dire tagging on of some lovey dovey ending where Rachel gets to live - she's a Rep, she dies, films don't need to have a happy ending.
As for the terrible narration....

I know it is all down to Personal Opinion but the Theatre Cut us just that - a cut.
Nobody except the studio wanted the cuts just so the film would run under the studios idea of "how long a film should be".
At the moment the Director's Cut is the definitive version and unless something extremely special happens in time for the next DVD release thankfully it will remain so.
 
I must be the only person who thinks Bladerunner is a boring ass film.
I've been trying to watch it this week, i cant manage anymore than 10 minutes at a time.
 
stoofa said:
And then the dire tagging on of some lovey dovey ending where Rachel gets to live - she's a Rep, she dies, films don't need to have a happy ending.
Click to expand...

The film industry has a habit of this. :(

Look at what could have been a fantastic film... A.I.

It could have been fantastic if Spielberg hadn't got involved with it and Kubrick lived to see it through.

Simon/~Flibster
 
stoofa said:
What is it with people and "Originals".
Do people feel feel that when something is remade, even as the director wants but couldn't at the time due to technology constrainsts or similar that they are somehow doing it as a personal attack on you?
Click to expand...
Nope, just like the theatre release more.
stoofa said:
I am a massive Bladerunner fan.
From the minute I saw the film it has been my favourite film of all time and now, many, many years later it is still my favourite film of all time.
I'm 30 now and even if you only say I've had 15 years of serious film watching there are a lot of films over those 15 years to rival Bladerunner.

I don't understand how any true fan of the film can accept the two flaws that appear in the "Original Cut".
How the removal of the whole dream sequence that actually opens up the question "Was Deckard a Rep?" makes the film any better. If you are a fan of the original film there is no "Deckard=Rep" question, the film never asks us it.
Click to expand...
I don't think the Unicorn added anything other than a sledgehammer subtlety. When Deckard is sat at the piano looking at his photos, it is obvious that he is questioning his own "personal history". When Rachel asks if Deckard has ever taken the test, it is a clear hint that anyone could be a Rep. Who else but a Rep could track other Reps?
stoofa said:
And then the dire tagging on of some lovey dovey ending where Rachel gets to live - she's a Rep, she dies, films don't need to have a happy ending.
As for the terrible narration....
Click to expand...

I like the "terrible narration. It helps explain the film. I think the "Director's Cut version is a fine film but without having seen the original, how would most people know what on earth is going on? The narration was added because in previews, the audiences were baffled.

stoofa said:
I know it is all down to Personal Opinion but the Theatre Cut us just that - a cut.
Nobody except the studio wanted the cuts just so the film would run under the studios idea of "how long a film should be".
At the moment the Director's Cut is the definitive version and unless something extremely special happens in time for the next DVD release thankfully it will remain so.
Click to expand...

Ridley Scott should accept that the extraordinary regard for his film is because of both versions and use the narration on top of the "Director's Cut".
 
atpbx said:
I must be the only person who thinks Bladerunner is a boring ass film.
I've been trying to watch it this week, i cant manage anymore than 10 minutes at a time.
Click to expand...

No, I think it's rubbish as well. It never really got going and then it ended and I had missed what makes people gush over it.
 
MikeTimbers said:
Ridley Scott should accept that the extraordinary regard for his film is because of both versions and use the narration on top of the "Director's Cut".
Click to expand...

Nail on head. :)
 
Well - I got the new release of the Directors cut earlier this month.

Looks better than ever tbh.

There's been a lot of restoration work on it. :D

Now to pre-order the special edition set. ;)

Simon/~Flibster
 
I was going to buy the "new" release of the Directors Cut however as far as I'm aware this is just the cleaned up release isn't it?
As big a fan as I am - it's the Special Edition version next year that I'm oh so waiting for :)
 
I got my copy the other day but not watched. I remember the original version I had and the quality of that was horrible.

Hoping they release it in a hi-def format too :D

I think it's supposed to get a limited theatrical release when it comes out as well?
 
Flibster said:
Well - I got the new release of the Directors cut earlier this month.

Looks better than ever tbh.

There's been a lot of restoration work on it. :D

Now to pre-order the special edition set. ;)

Simon/~Flibster
Click to expand...
i thought it inst out yet, a ocuk cpmpetitor says *** 9/10/06 ?:S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom