What's New in Blade Runner - The Final Cut?

tripper700 writes "25 years since its original release, a definitive version of Ridley Scott's science fiction masterwork Blade Runner, Blade Runner: The Final Cut, has been released. So what exactly has changed? And is it worth all the fuss? SFFMedia describes each change in detail. Is it just a patch up job attempting to cash in on a cult film? Or like an oil painter retouching a masterpiece, or a novelist polishing prose, is Ridley Scott simply trying to perfect his original vision?"

Re:Riddle me this:

[fyngyrz]

IMHO, watch the one with the voiceover. Certainly watch that one first. Like most Hollywood movies, the transition from book to movie was made clumsily, protestations of "art" notwithstanding. Deckard's voiceover is done tastefully and serves to focus the movie in many places where it becomes meaningless and context-free in the "director's cut."

One of the best 2-3 SF movies ever made in the voiceover version.

Re:Riddle me this:

[greg1104]

Some people recommend watching the theatrical release first, presumably because they agree with the studio that the film was too hard to follow otherwise. Unfortunately that version also loses much of the atmosphere of the film, as the voice-over added interrupts and masks the music and visual work that you can appreciate better in the director's cut (or this final version). As long as you can follow the plot this final cut should be the best version yet to watch. So as I see it, this turns into a slightly different question: how to lower the risk that you may get annoyed at not knowing what's going on when you watch the movie?

Watching the voice-over version first is one way to do that, but if you like it you really need to turn right around and watch the final one to get the good version. What I suggest instead to those who like reading Science Fiction books anyway is to read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" first, then see the best available version without the voice-over--that will now be this Final Cut version. That way you will know what's going on but won't have your first viewing distracted by the voice-over. The book and movie have many shared elements but plenty of things that are different between the two; both have unique elements worth experiencing, and it's not the case that the book "ruins" the movie or anything.

Five versions

[magunning]

The box set released in a few weeks will contain five versions of the movie.

Workprint version - pre-release test screening version
US original cinematic version
International original cinematic version
Directors cut - 1992 version - approved by Scott, but he was not directly involved
Final cut - Scott had complete control over this version

The Digital Bits' Review

[antdude]

Yesterday, The Digital Bits [thedigitalbits.com] posted its long review on this set.

Re:Five versions

[gEvil (beta)]

HD DVD is region free, which is kind of nice since some of the BluRay exclusives in the US are released on HD DVD elsewhere in the world. Xploited Cinema [xploitedcinema.com] specializes in these releases for those of us in the States.

Re:Riddle me this:

[gEvil (beta)]

There are some great articles around that detail the whole Blade Runner saga--definitely worth looking up. In short, due to the original production being over-budget, ownership of the movie went to the underwriters, who decided to add in the voiceover and happy ending after the movie tested poorly. This was a rush job, and both Ford and Scott were against the changes. When the first Director's Cut came out, they reverted some of the stuff back, but again, it was a rush job, so Scott didn't get an opportunity to really go back over it the way he wanted to (apparently he wasn't even really involved in this). There was supposed to be a big 20th anniversary release, but there were still legal wranglings over ownership. Finally, for the 25th anniversary, the ownership issues were sorted out, and Scott was given ample time to really sit down and polish the movie the way he wanted to originally. Since technology had advanced so much, they took the opportunity to clean up the effects a bit (using the original assets--no Special Edition crap here). The end result of all of this is the Final Cut.

Stupid comment

[glwtta]

"Equally, if Deckard really is a Nexus 7 created to work as an exterminator, why is he lacking the strength of the inferior Nexus 6 models he is chasing?"

Well, gee, if he is not supposed to know he's a replicant, super-human strength might be a bit of a give-away, no?

Cash in?

[Lahiru]

Blade Runner has only been released once on DVD, over 10 years ago; as you can imagine, that DVD isn't exactly a top of the line release anymore. If they wanted to cash in easily they could've just issued a new edition with a clean transfer and sound and a few obligatory special features. If you look at the specs for these releases, they are quite comprehensive! And from what I've read about this new release it's been in the works for some time and a lot of work has gone into it... While, obviously, the studio released a new version to make money, they seem to have done a good job [wikipedia.org] with this one.

FUCKING P.C.

[Romwell]

I haven't seen it yet, but what's wrong with the director ? Seemingly, he added more gore, but removed the line

"I want more life, FUCKER"

?! For me, it was a significant line, and it was working well in the movie. This was the point in the movie where the roles of master and slave between Tyrell and Roy were reversed. It was Roy now who was in control. If you replace "fucker" with respectful "father", you lose that, you'll get a respectful 'son'.
I've seen both the international/theatrical lasedirsk version and the Director's Cut, and I liked the Director's cut more (no voiceovers, unicorn). But this time I might pass on it. If I get a chance to see it in a theater, I will; but for DVD I'll stick to 1992 version.

Soundtrack Change

[DynaSoar]

Remastering Vangelis's soundtrack is not the half of it. He withdrew his recordings just prior to first release, and the entire soundtrack was rerecorded by a group of musicians Scott hastily put together. Vangelis didn't approve release of his version until 1994. Anyone familiar with Vangelis' work will be confident his recording will be much superior to the impromptu "New American Orchestra". It has been released on CD, but I don't believe it's been included in a version of Blade Runner prior to this.

Re:Doesn't matter.

[Altima(BoB)]

Well, as far as making the original versions of Blade Runner available, the expensive 5 disc edition of the Final Cut (in all 3 formats, DVD, HDDVD, Blu-Ray) contain every single cut of the film that's ever been released, in their entirety. I don't know how you could ask for better, even though it is expensive and who knows how long it'll be available (In my opinion, while original cuts should be made available, expect to find it more difficult to obtain. In the case of Kingdom of Heaven for instance, I'm amazed that the director's cut hasn't totally replaced the standard release DVD, because the former is so, astonishingly superior, and transforms the original from a mediocre, or even bad film, to a worthy one. Same goes for "Alexander: The Final Cut" In my opinion the original cuts of both should be replaced by the later cuts.)

But as for Star Wars, you CAN get the original cuts on DVD. Though I think you had to buy them separately, and each box came with the special edition, remastered with all that fanciness, while the original cuts were in a lame non anamorphic laserdisc master. So even though you can still technically get the originals on DVD, it has deliberately less quality, and as such is kind of subversive in my view...

Re:Riddle me this:

[xubu_caapn]

that's not true. he didn't tank the voiceover, he's stated himself his narration was just bad because he didn't know what he was reading, or how it fit into the movie.

Re:Riddle me this:

[Chris Burke]

Horse poop. You've already seen the version with the voice over, so you know what is going on in the director's cut. If you watch the director's cut for the first time ever, you have absolutely no clue WTF is going on. Only after watching the original, do you know what was going on in the director's cut.

Yeah, whatever. I saw the director's cut first, and I had no problems figuring out what was happening. When I watched the theatrical release, I thought the unnecessary explanation of everything was distracting at best, insulting at worst.

And speaking of no clue WTF is going on, in the theatrical version sans dream sequence, the origami unicorn at the end means nothing except that Gaff had been there. The deeper implications are gone.

But then again, the same people who made the decision to add the voice over were the same ones who decided to shoe horn in a deus ex machina happy ending (Surprise! Rachel is special and won't die! And what do you mean, "what about Decker"?) because they didn't think the audience could handle the protagonists getting away, but still being subject to a shortened lifespan.

IMO, the voice over gives the movie the right character. Someday soon, when the technology is there, we the fans will do our own version with Harrison's voice in a fan voice over cut.

And that version will suck even more. Please don't try to pull a Lucas and go back to something twenty years old and try to "improve" it, and at least he was the guy who came up with it in the first place. Ridley Scott can easily be forgiven for the Director's Cut since it was in fact the version of the movie that he wanted to release originally. It remains to be seen if the "Final Cut" is a cut too far.

But unless this hypothetical tech can not just reproduce Ford's voice but also his acting ability (so, a time in the future when actors are obsolete) you're pretty much guaranteed to be polishing a turd with more turd, ignoring what these voice-over-loving fans do with the script. You might as well use the voice of Jar Jar, at least then it'd be amusing.

Re:It's hard to imagine not hearing the voiceovers

[MsGeek]

"I want more life, father" was the line as it was shown in test marketing. It also appears in the notorious "70mm Workprint" version, aka "The Nuart Version" which will finally be available to the public on Disk 5 of the uber leet briefcase version. "I want more life, fucker" is my preference. But Ridley Scott made the call on this one. He believes the scene hangs together better when the whole religious/father-son aspect of the scene remains intact. It was not a bowdlerization. The cut made for TV has Batty saying "I want more life."

This was an artistic decision. Not a bid for a reconsideration of the MPAA rating. The theatrical release is still considered a hard-R, 25 years later.

Re:Five versions

[Smorkin' Labbit]

HD-DVD is region free, whereas Blu-ray supports region-coding. However, the idea is that catalogue releases will not be region-coded (catalogue = film finished playing on the big screenmore than a year ago, approximately), but this is really up to the movie companies. So far Sony & Disney follows this (so Ratatouille is region-coded, Cars is not) but sometimes they do region-free stuff even if the movie is new; FOX tends to region-code everything (although there are signs they are moving to region-free for older movies, like Die Hard 1-3); Warner doesn't region-code anything (so Bladerunner is OK to buy anywhere). Nice, and not at all confusing, right?

Re:Doesn't matter.

[blzabub]

Yes agreed, Han is definitely an archetype derived from Western mythology and other places, Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces [wikipedia.org], etc. which is a well documented influence on Lucas. I've seen many a Western with similar characters as you describe: Shane, The Searchers, Doc Holiday in Tombstone, etc...

Re:That's nothing.

[TychoCelchuuu]

Darwinia [darwinia.co.uk] definitely has the kind of graphics you're talking about. CGI used for style, not just for kicks.