• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Blade Runner 2049 writers became victims of io9 clickbait enabled by LordOfLore

The first time I watched Blade Runner, it was on Netflix (or some other streaming service, I can't remember) and it claimed to be the Final Cut, but it was actually the original theatrical cut, which I only found out later after people told me the Final Cut had no narration.
 

ZeoVGM

Banned
LordOfLore, man, I've warned you in the past about the clickbait sites.

You didn't listen.

They never listen. :(
 
I watched what must have been the international variant of the original release in 1982. The one with a hard-boiled detective narrative by Deckard, and sans unicorn daydream.

I watched the 1993 Director's Cut version. It was like seeing an old friend with a new haircut. The important thing is not the haircut.

After that it's a bit of a blur.

They are all substantially the same film.

Some escaped slaves, having mutinied, are hunted down and summarily executed by a ruthless state-sanctioned assassin even as they reach the end of their brief flowering of life. The killer is the human, the slaves are androids. The slaves kill to survive, but are also shown to take pleasure in the act. The assassin hates his job. It's the future so everything is morally ambiguous and sushi is in.

The last surviving mutineer, having turned the tables on the assassin, spares his life long enough to deliver an extraordinary speech about the wonders he had seen in his brief life, and his yearning to live. He dies.

The assassin, having fallen in love with another slave, runs off into the desert with her, even though he knows their life together will be brief.
 

Jedi2016

Member
As for the life-span discussion, I was always under the impression it was built into them. In the theatrical cut, Deckard specifically mentions that Rachel didn't have it (which, now that I think about it, seems counter to Gaff's statement that "she won't live", but I can't remember if that line was even in the theatrical cut or if Gaff would have known about Rachel's custom design, or whatever).

Anyway, my interpretation of the discussion with Tyrell is that he wasn't able to extend the life of a replicant that was already alive, that it had to be done at inception (during the design phase) or not at all. The "candle burns twice as bright" was just trying to make Roy feel better about his own impending death. It seems to lean that way because Tyrell doesn't seem upset or really defensive at all during that conversation... he's not trying to beg for his life, he's talking to Roy as if he were a child.

That's how I read it, anyway.
 

Qvoth

Member
i was just thinking of watching the original and the new anime short this weekend, had no idea there are multiple versions
any suggestions on which one i should watch?

edit: after some googling seems like final cut's the definitive version and director's cut the 2nd choice
 
Top Bottom