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

131–140 of 435 posts

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#131

Post by modeless »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #25
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?

Does it have to look dystopian to count? I enjoyed "Her" and thought it was bold and original, in a different way.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#132

Post by CyanBird »

Retric wrote: post #118
CyanBird wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it is thanks to these two movies that modern scifi and its visual development side of things exists basically

They popularized these styles but they existed in other mediums. What’s fascinating is looking at all the different styles Dune the dune book covers had over time to see how various mediums influenced things. https://www.biblio.com/dune-by-herbert-frank/work/3104

That's a good angle

But that's the thing, jodos dune came as an aggregate of "non-movie" mediums, because jodorowsky was not a cinematographer by trade he was an avant garde theater person, giger, Dali, moebius, Foss, neither of them "were part" of the "movies" medium, they all and the rest of the crew were painters or writers or musicians, comic book artists, not cinematographers per se, in that sense what jodorowsky set to do was not even a movie as we might think of one today, but an agglomeration of different types and styles of art with all their own individual Influences mixed in

I think today, it would be nearly impossible for "works" to exist and not have been inspired themselves in some degree by the downstream effects and inspiration that jodorowskys movie had, just think that starwars itself is inspired by it

But anyhow, it is a quite interesting food for thought

If anyone knows of some niche modern scifi books or works which might not be influenced by this failed dune movie let me know, I love this stuff

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#133

Post by ghaff »

sorokod wrote: post #107
ghaff wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I watched apocalypse now soon after it's release and was completely blown away by it. There is a soundtrack album to which I listen occasionally.

There were definitely other Vietnam War and related films like Platoon and Coming Home which were probably more highly regarded at the time but haven't had the staying power of Apocalypse Now.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#134

Post by the_gipsy »

ffhhj wrote: post #89
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.

Aren't we all meaningless ants?

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#135

Post by bryanrasmussen »

jmyeet wrote: post #82
HorizonXP wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I mean I agree, on the other hand if it's no more realistic perhaps this means that the fiction part of science fiction actually takes precedence despite coming second and thus is actually not any sort of evidence of its being a bad movie.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#137

Post by corrral »

ffhhj wrote: post #89
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.

A fairly ineffective detective protagonist teasing at the edges of something much bigger, and mostly getting steamrolled by it, is a common noir thing. Not universal, but a frequently-used trope.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#138

Post by freeflight »

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.)

Oof, that's sad..

I really liked RbW but didn't want to get too invested because it felt like it wouldn't even get a second season. Then the second season was released, got me really invested, and now this, booh!

At least the second season of Foundation is still being filmed, looking forward to that and hopefully that will last past two seasons.

The Three-Body Problem is getting a TV show on Netflix, heard good things about the books, maybe the show can live up to them.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#139

Post by corrral »

ghaff wrote: post #78
HorizonXP wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to ask then, what films do you like better than Interstellar?

Countless SF films. I found Interstellar very middle-drawer. I didn't hate it but certainly wasn't wowed by it.

It was a fine excuse to have a few big-budget sci-fi themed FX spectacles.

Could have stood to be a full hour shorter, though.

Re: ‘Blade Runner’ at 40

#140

Post by Sporktacular »

Ridley Scott is a middling, hit and miss director who has said that if something does well he'll follow up with sequels. It's a kind of throw it at the wall and see what sticks approach as opposed to committing to a vision and knowing when to let it end.

Blade Runner was an ambitious, pretty, ambient but also boring film. To refer to it as the GOAT is hyperbolic. To call Scott a genius etc. because of Blade Runner is also unjustified because all its strengths trace directly to PKD, Syd Mead, Jordan Cronenweth etc.

It's one seriously overhyped film. All subjective of course, but then so are such articles and they arguably add to the hype.

Post reply on HN