Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Blade Runner’ at 40

esquire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 435 posts

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#21

Post by ur-whale »

jmyeet wrote: post #9

I am one of the 11 people on Earth that hates coffee. "Hate" isn't strong enough. Even "despises" I'm not sure goes far enough. It tastes disgusting to me. I can't even stand the smell. This has led me at times to wonder if I'm crazy or if everyone else is. I do notice a ton of people consume a ton of sugar in their coffee so it seems like many don't really like coffee. They like sugar. But I digresss. I have the sam…

> I just don't get the hype.

IMO, much depends on when you were born.

When it came out, Blade Runner was truly something else and rode in on multiple deep cultural vibes of that era (e.g. Japan, Vangelis's synth music, etc...).

Second, the book it was based on (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Androids_Dream_of_Electric_...) was also quite unique in the SF genre of that era, as was the author (Phil K Dick).

The thing is : on top of that, amazingly enough, the visuals / art direction has aged rather well, going from what was a futuristic vibe at the time to something that now looks steampunk-ish.

I must confess to being boringly average when it comes the Blade Runner: I do love the movie, and it is certainly in my top ten sci-fi movies list.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#23

Post by aresant »

The visual language Bladerunner invented has virtually defined SciFi for the past 40 years.

If you enjoy it's worth digging into the work Syd Mead - the film's concept artist - created:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/5642443624/in/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/5642443252/in/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/5641873923/in/...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/5642441904/in/...

Syd's work in general is worth a deeper investigation if interested ->

https://sydmead.com/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/40143737@N02/albums/7215762290...

https://www.iamag.co/the-art-of-syd-mead/

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#24

Post by AdamJacobMuller »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #6
hedora wrote: post #2

Oh crap; they cancelled Raised by Wolves: https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/raised-by-wolves-ca... Unbelievable! (Ridley Scott was involved with it.)

it wasn’t particularly good, I really really wanted to like it and persevered through the whole thing… and it’s just a mess

I really enjoyed the aesthetic of it, I enjoyed the tone and even many of the major story elements but I found it so hard to track the story.

It's unfortunate because the show had the great thematic elements (Mithraic vs atheist war -- mother as a godlike angel etc) and had amazing small details but lost itself somewhere in-between. Why was there a giant worm and why did everyone forget about the giant worm in Season 2 ?

This might be a Ridley Scott problem, because, everything I said can also apply to Prometheus.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#25

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

modeless wrote: post #3

I had a professor in college who was obsessed with Blade Runner and had us watch it in class. I just didn't get it. I mean I love sci-fi, but Blade Runner was just OK. Maybe in the context of its time it was great, pioneering, all that stuff. But in the context of now, or even back when I was in college (closer to the release of Blade Runner than present day, yikes), it didn't seem that special to me. I guess now tha…

I think it still holds up. Very few films are as bold and original today. Everything is CGI focus group contrived garbage now.

What good recent scifi comes close? Dune? Bladerunner 2049?

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#26

Post by AdamJacobMuller »

davesque wrote: post #16

Calling it the "greatest of all time" seems like a total exaggeration. That being said, I've found it interesting that a film that in many ways seems so dated manages to have such a hypnotic effect on me every time I watch it. I think it's just one of Ridley Scott's directorial gifts that he manages to conjure up such an infectious mood in so many of his films. Of course, the other example is Alien . I definitely lov…

> Calling it the "greatest of all time" seems like a total exaggeration

I was thinking this at first but I've struggled with a suggestion of a better, and critically more impactful/influential, movie in the genere.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#27

Post by easeout »

Just an incredible film. Even the slow parts, and there are a lot of them, have so much rich setting to marvel at.

The love scene comes across as nonconsensual and it makes me uncomfortable every time. Whether that's intended discomfort or an artistic regret, I don't know.

Other than that, it's one of my all time favorites for the reasons others are mentioning. I recommend the 2007 Final Cut.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#28

Post by ur-whale »

hedora wrote: post #2

Oh crap; they cancelled Raised by Wolves: https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/raised-by-wolves-ca... Unbelievable! (Ridley Scott was involved with it.)

Yeah, well ... very interesting series, with lots of unusual/interesting ideas and really creative visuals, but sorry to say, the storyline was a complete mess and unexciting and depressing.

Not surprised it was canned: however much makeup you put on a pig ... it's still a pig.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#29

Post by modeless »

golergka wrote: post #17
georgeecollins wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you saw it in the context of movies of its time you would understand the appeal, if not appreciate it. So many things imitate it that the most original parts seem like cliches. The other thing is that it holds up for most people, so that it is better when you go back to it because you see thing you missed the first time.

This is literally what “Seinfeld is unfunny” trope is about. The original, groundbreaking work gets quoted and used so much that a modern viewer doesn't see anything original in it anymore.

Some things survive this process, though, and some don't. For example, I didn't see Alien until after I saw Blade Runner. I see Alien as more influential and copied than Blade Runner, yet I still think it's great.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#30

Post by Agentlien »

duxup wrote: post #19

I hated that movie the first to I saw it. I was bored with it. Now I love it. I really enjoy how much time they spend establishing the atmosphere and characters. It all feels very real and has depth. I loath the speedy sci fi that tries to touch on atmosphere and then hurries along with their paper characters and so on. So much sci fi I encounter now feels little more than a long trailer with no idea how to end.

I'm the other way around. I loved the atmosphere and the slow pace when I first saw it. But ever since I read the book I can't enjoy it the same way. I feel it just doesn't do it justice.
Post reply on HN