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

81–90 of 435 posts

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#81

Post by bryanrasmussen »

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…

Tyrell is of Scandinavian origin, Eldon Tyrell was played by Joe Turkel, the name in Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep was the Rosen corporation. I figure it was more fear of Germanic people than Japanese.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#82

Post by jmyeet »

HorizonXP wrote: post #14
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 have to ask then, what films do you like better than Interstellar?

My view is a little more negative because of all the hype it gets but only a little. It's just a bad movie.

SPOILER WARNING

To understand the plot structure (such that it is) in Interstellar, you have to start with the writer's desire for the emotional ending of the main character with his daughter, who is now old. Everything that happens in the movie is a really forced way to reach that outcome.

The whole watch time-travel thing was more of that illogical nonsense in service of that conclusion.

The time dilation to make all this happens just doesn't work that way. You have to get to a significant percentage of c before time dilation becomes really noticeable. For example, at 0.9c you're still only at ~2x time dilation [1].

The gravity effects of the black hole don't make sense either.

The "science" of Interstellar is no more realistic than Star Trek or Starship Troopers.

[1]: https://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/timedial.html

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#83

Post by ghaff »

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…

FWIW, Blade Runner (like some other films e.g. Apocalypse Now) weren't considered as anything special at the time but were more appreciated as the years went on with or without director's cuts.

That said, I really liked both at the time.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#84

Post by colordrops »

I would disagree and posit that 2001 is the GOAT. Most scifi is heavily influenced by it. The artistry is unsurpassed. The scope and depth of the story is mind blowing.

I was at lunch talking with coworkers about scifi movies. None of them even heard about 2001. It was quite shocking to me. I was the oldest at the table, but I'm not that old.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#85

Post by bsder »

kebman wrote: post #20

Thinking about what was possible to make in 1982, it's pretty amazing. It's an absolute classic, up there with the best of the noirs (the actual film noirs), such as The Maltese Falcon, Double Indemnity and The Third Man; the logical answer to the Neo Noir Body Heat the year before. It's like a legacy moving onto such things as Ghost in the Shell and even The Matrix.

And I think that's why it flopped initially but has such staying power.

Balde Runner is fundamentally film noir and the sci-fi is just the setting.

The essential conflicts are human conflicts--not technological ones. You can replace the setting and you still have mostly the same story.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#86

Post by juliangamble »

mrandish wrote: post #42
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 first saw BR in a theater the month it originally came out. It's hard to appreciate from today's perspective just how revolutionary it was. The film itself, especially the original cut, is flawed due to the studio making last minute edits which the director, cast and writers were against. Yet, it is still the one science fiction film that has been more visually influential than any other. It changed everything that…

> BR largely created that bucket.

Combined with William Gibson’s Neuromancer. It was a combined effort.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#87

Post by Joeri »

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #47
fb03 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was also baffled by the "interstellar is trash" line. Maybe I watched it wrong.

I didn't love Interstellar the first time I saw it. When I watched Inception for the first time I walked out of the theatre in love with that movie (and I still am), but, leaving Interstellar I felt confused and underwhelmed. Perversely I think I was actually very overwhelmed by Interstellar because after seeing it many times in the almost a decade since it came out (oh my god how has it been 10 years) it's become on…

I had a similar experience. It is one of my favorite scifi movies, and it gets better with every viewing. I think it also resonates especially because I have a young daughter myself. The soundtrack though, that clicked right away. I never get tired of that soundtrack. In fact, I would say it is my favorite soundtrack of any movie ever made.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#89

Post by ffhhj »

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 love Blade Runner, but I find the detective to be a useless entity, like an ant walking in a deeper world that makes him meaningless. And the idea of them not being able to discover which are the cyborgs makes no sense.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#90

Post by colordrops »

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #62
muro wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "ages" jumping weirdness just ruined it, IMHO. Beautiful middle part, though.

Beautiful opening, great story in the middle, utterly incomprehensible ending. Kubrick was no doubt a genius and mystery is a part of storytelling, the entirety of Eyes Wide Shut leaves so much room for mystique and interpretation that we can debate and discuss it forever but I did not find similar in the ending of 2001, it seemed like confusion for confusions sake with little deeper meaning.

Arthur C Clarke is one of the greatest sci fi authors of all time and wrote the book in conjunction with the movie with Stanley Kubrick. They are meant to be consumed together. Read the book and the movie makes a lot more sense. There is virtually zero ambiguity if you read the book.
Post reply on HN