Why I loved the original Bladerunner...
Nov. 17th, 2017 08:28 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatIt's funny, or maybe not so funny, the things that I read online that inspire a post. Sometimes it's something as simple as a random comment to a spoilery review of a new movie that I peeked at.
The random comment: "Why do you like Bladerunner? I never understood the cult appeal of that film."
Why do we like what we like? It's an interesting question. Not everyone can easily answer. Clint Eastwood was once asked why he liked the films he did. And his response: "I just like them, I don't feel the need to think too hard about it. And does it matter? I just like what I like." Not everyone is introspective or reflective about these sorts of things.
I saw BladeRunner -- the original version with Rutguer Hauer, Daryl Hannah, Harrison Ford and Scean Young in the early 1980s, when it first premiered in theaters. My mother took me to it, and it was just us and about twenty other people in the theater. We loved it so much we drug the rest of the family to it soon after. (We were to repeat the experience shortly thereafter with Back to the Future -- a film neither of us were overtly fond of and had rated poorly in the pre-screening that we went to, but people loved for whatever reason. My mother found Back to the Future to be predictable and rather silly, cringe-inducing in places. My father however enjoyed it tremendously. And we saw the sequels in the theaters -- but movies were admittedly much cheaper back then.)
I asked my mother what it was about Bladerunner that she loved.
She said, "I think it was a combination of things. What stands out to me is the noir storyline so similar to Sam Spade and the Raymond Chandler stories of the 1940s, and it reminded me a great deal of Ray Bradbury -- it had the depth of Bradbury. Also..Rutger Hauer, who played the replicant, not really the bad guy...who well his interaction with Decker and how he, he just was so good in it. The characters just felt real and you sort of fall in love with them."
Me: "For me, it just was so different than any other science fiction film that I'd seen. There were no aliens or monsters. It had something to say -- something crucial to the human condition. It asked what it meant to be human? And who was more human, the replicants or those who hunted them or those who created them? How did we value life? It asked these deep psychological and philosophical questions about the human experience without really answering them."
There's this scene towards the end of the film, between Decker and Hauer on the roof that seems to be embedded in my head, ingrained on my retina. And it in many ways explains why I loved this film, why it resonates with me to this day, and why I own it on DVD, prior to that owned on VHS. Most of it improvised by Hauer. I'll see if I can find it.
Ah, I did...it's the "Tears in Rain Monologue"
Roy to Decker: "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave. I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I've watched sea-beams glitter in the dark nearthe ten-house of Tannhauser Gates...All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die." And he bows his head and lets go of the dove he's been holding...it flies up to the blue sky above..as if it holds his soul upon its wings. [ETA: Tannhauser Gate sounds like ten-house gate, I had no clue until londonkds told me..]
In that small piece of monologue so much is conveyed...what it means to be human, what it means to die, what it means to be alive and how precious time is...not to mention memory.
Bladerunner is one of those films that I find myself turning over and over again in my mind. Wanting to write reams of meta on, and read essays about. I never wanted a sequel to it. Nor feel the need to see the sequel that has been made. It would seem somehow lacking without Rutger Hauer, who was the heart and soul of the first one. And I think I may have written fanfic in my head...for the film is a bit open-ended and lends itself to fanfic. Unlike so many films and television shows, Bladerunner was similar to the noir films of the 1930s, 40s, and 50s...and the Philip K. Dick and Ray Bradbury stories upon which it was based...asking more questions than answering. It left what happened next to the audience, along with the world, and the answers.
It is dystopian universe? Less so than The Hunger Games, or the Terminator series, which is far darker in some respects and less hopeful than Bladerunner. The ending is a hopeful one, Decker seems to question his role as a bladerunner, and what it means to be human...to see the creators of the replicants along with his own breed of hunter in a darker light. There are two ending's though...the one in the director's cut and the one that aired in the cinema. In some respects I prefer the latter, although it's a toss-up.
Visually, Bladerunner was stunning...it managed to wed two genres, the noir mystery genre with speculative science fiction in a different way. Some of the images are breathtaking -- such as Hauer letting go of the dove...and it flying into the pale blue sky. Others, ugly and disturbing.
It was also innovative and some respects changed the film industry -- you can see references to it in later films in the 90s and even now. I saw them in Farscape -- which had hand-painted settings and worlds that reminded me a great deal of the rain-soaked landscape of BladeRunner.
Ford played against type here...he was in the anti-hero reactive role, and in some respects it is among his better roles, may well be the best one he's done. (Normally he's in more of a pro-active heroic role -- at least up to this point.) But Hauer steals the film and it is in many ways Hauer's film -- where he plays the alleged bad guy, but in reality is just a victim trying to survive and Decker finds his white hat tarnished and blacker than he thought. Much blacker. The film is shown in shades of gray, as are its characters. It's not easy on it's audience like Star Wars or Star Trek, but gritty and real, with layered and not so likable characters. Shining a bright mirror in our faces and asking us, what is real, what is hope, and what is it to be human, to be alive?
The film haunts long after the final reel. I remember it better than Harry Potter film I've seen, and I read those books and saw those films just a scant five-ten years ago. OR for that matter the popular culture fav's "Back to the Future", which was a hit. Certainly far better than the recent Terminator flicks or the Matrix. Why? Because it resonated with me. It touched my heart in a way those did not.
But, as I write this I wonder as I often have in the past why it is important to try to explain what may well be the inexplicable. There are just some things we can't explain to someone else. They either get it or they don't. And when they do? It's magic. Isn't it? And when they don't? We feel that much more alone somehow...on a rooftop, in the rain, as time drifts by us, our memories flying upwards into the sky.
The random comment: "Why do you like Bladerunner? I never understood the cult appeal of that film."
Why do we like what we like? It's an interesting question. Not everyone can easily answer. Clint Eastwood was once asked why he liked the films he did. And his response: "I just like them, I don't feel the need to think too hard about it. And does it matter? I just like what I like." Not everyone is introspective or reflective about these sorts of things.
I saw BladeRunner -- the original version with Rutguer Hauer, Daryl Hannah, Harrison Ford and Scean Young in the early 1980s, when it first premiered in theaters. My mother took me to it, and it was just us and about twenty other people in the theater. We loved it so much we drug the rest of the family to it soon after. (We were to repeat the experience shortly thereafter with Back to the Future -- a film neither of us were overtly fond of and had rated poorly in the pre-screening that we went to, but people loved for whatever reason. My mother found Back to the Future to be predictable and rather silly, cringe-inducing in places. My father however enjoyed it tremendously. And we saw the sequels in the theaters -- but movies were admittedly much cheaper back then.)
I asked my mother what it was about Bladerunner that she loved.
She said, "I think it was a combination of things. What stands out to me is the noir storyline so similar to Sam Spade and the Raymond Chandler stories of the 1940s, and it reminded me a great deal of Ray Bradbury -- it had the depth of Bradbury. Also..Rutger Hauer, who played the replicant, not really the bad guy...who well his interaction with Decker and how he, he just was so good in it. The characters just felt real and you sort of fall in love with them."
Me: "For me, it just was so different than any other science fiction film that I'd seen. There were no aliens or monsters. It had something to say -- something crucial to the human condition. It asked what it meant to be human? And who was more human, the replicants or those who hunted them or those who created them? How did we value life? It asked these deep psychological and philosophical questions about the human experience without really answering them."
There's this scene towards the end of the film, between Decker and Hauer on the roof that seems to be embedded in my head, ingrained on my retina. And it in many ways explains why I loved this film, why it resonates with me to this day, and why I own it on DVD, prior to that owned on VHS. Most of it improvised by Hauer. I'll see if I can find it.
Ah, I did...it's the "Tears in Rain Monologue"
Roy to Decker: "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave. I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I've watched sea-beams glitter in the dark near
In that small piece of monologue so much is conveyed...what it means to be human, what it means to die, what it means to be alive and how precious time is...not to mention memory.
Bladerunner is one of those films that I find myself turning over and over again in my mind. Wanting to write reams of meta on, and read essays about. I never wanted a sequel to it. Nor feel the need to see the sequel that has been made. It would seem somehow lacking without Rutger Hauer, who was the heart and soul of the first one. And I think I may have written fanfic in my head...for the film is a bit open-ended and lends itself to fanfic. Unlike so many films and television shows, Bladerunner was similar to the noir films of the 1930s, 40s, and 50s...and the Philip K. Dick and Ray Bradbury stories upon which it was based...asking more questions than answering. It left what happened next to the audience, along with the world, and the answers.
It is dystopian universe? Less so than The Hunger Games, or the Terminator series, which is far darker in some respects and less hopeful than Bladerunner. The ending is a hopeful one, Decker seems to question his role as a bladerunner, and what it means to be human...to see the creators of the replicants along with his own breed of hunter in a darker light. There are two ending's though...the one in the director's cut and the one that aired in the cinema. In some respects I prefer the latter, although it's a toss-up.
Visually, Bladerunner was stunning...it managed to wed two genres, the noir mystery genre with speculative science fiction in a different way. Some of the images are breathtaking -- such as Hauer letting go of the dove...and it flying into the pale blue sky. Others, ugly and disturbing.
It was also innovative and some respects changed the film industry -- you can see references to it in later films in the 90s and even now. I saw them in Farscape -- which had hand-painted settings and worlds that reminded me a great deal of the rain-soaked landscape of BladeRunner.
Ford played against type here...he was in the anti-hero reactive role, and in some respects it is among his better roles, may well be the best one he's done. (Normally he's in more of a pro-active heroic role -- at least up to this point.) But Hauer steals the film and it is in many ways Hauer's film -- where he plays the alleged bad guy, but in reality is just a victim trying to survive and Decker finds his white hat tarnished and blacker than he thought. Much blacker. The film is shown in shades of gray, as are its characters. It's not easy on it's audience like Star Wars or Star Trek, but gritty and real, with layered and not so likable characters. Shining a bright mirror in our faces and asking us, what is real, what is hope, and what is it to be human, to be alive?
The film haunts long after the final reel. I remember it better than Harry Potter film I've seen, and I read those books and saw those films just a scant five-ten years ago. OR for that matter the popular culture fav's "Back to the Future", which was a hit. Certainly far better than the recent Terminator flicks or the Matrix. Why? Because it resonated with me. It touched my heart in a way those did not.
But, as I write this I wonder as I often have in the past why it is important to try to explain what may well be the inexplicable. There are just some things we can't explain to someone else. They either get it or they don't. And when they do? It's magic. Isn't it? And when they don't? We feel that much more alone somehow...on a rooftop, in the rain, as time drifts by us, our memories flying upwards into the sky.
no subject
Date: 2017-11-18 10:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-11-18 02:29 pm (UTC)Hmmm, I don't know the reference, so missed both homage and joke.
no subject
Date: 2017-11-18 07:04 pm (UTC)