Movies you've just watched

[options]

lately I've been watching for the first time movies held as classics that I feel everyone is supposed to have seen. last week was Jaws. this week was Blade Runner ...and man, is it boring.

now, don't get me wrong—the mood/atmosphere created through the set design and lighting is incredible, especially considering the time in which it was made. the basic plot is kinda interesting too. it's too bad I don't really give a #$&! about any of the characters. everything is so flat and monotone and drawn out. there's TOO much mood and not enough of anything else. and I think I have a relatively high tolerance for artsy/minimalist movies. this, however, was simply a chore to watch. what's the big deal?

[emphatic]

Blade Runner ...and man, is it boring.

+1

[jonny5]

Blade Runner ...and man, is it boring.

+1

For serious, guys?

Did you watch the directors cut or the theatrical release?

[Xyga]

Blade Runner ...and man, is it boring.

+1

For serious, guys?

Did you watch the directors cut or the theatrical release?

Many people still don't get/like that movie. Can't be helped I guess...

You'll find even more disdain for 2001 A Space Odyssey.

[emphatic]

You'll find even more disdain for 2001 A Space Odyssey.

That one I like. Blade Runner looks awesome, but I just fall asleep every time I try to watch it.

[jonny5]

You'll find even more disdain for 2001 A Space Odyssey.

That one I like. Blade Runner looks awesome, but I just fall asleep every time I try to watch it.

You're breaking my heart emph

Have you ever read the Philip K. Dick story it was based on, 'Do androids dream of electric sheep'. It is arguably better than the film, but the film does such a great job of conveying the feel of that world in all it's little details. Also, you must watch the directors cut, so much better than the theatrical version.

[Xyga]

I see both movies (BR and 2001) as fantastic works of art and best ambassadors of their specific (sub)genres and era.

And I can see why some wouldn't like one or the other, frankly speaking it's hard to get in the mood for something that's not in the air anymore.
Like, you know I really tried to like The Day the Earth Stood Still or Forbidden Planet, but... meh.
Guess those felt awesome several decades ago but I just can't get 'in'.

[options]

the film does such a great job of conveying the feel of that world in all it's little details.

Also, you must watch the directors cut, so much better than the theatrical version.

Again, I felt the world that was created was great and very immersive, I just didn't care much about what was happening in it.

I did some poking around on imdb after I finished it... I saw the one without the voice-overs, so whichever one that is. I can't imagine they'd make a world of difference, tho... I may give it another try in the future.

Guess those felt awesome several decades ago but I just can't get 'in'.

yeah. I feel that way about certain albums too, but that's another topic...

[Some-Mist]

and best ambassadors of their specific (sub)genres and era.

Tarkovsky's Solaris is pretty up there..

[PC Engine Fan X!]

Yep, Blade Runner bombed at the U.S. film box office when it made it's debut back in December of 1982. It's been said that some movie theaters would show it but only a handful of folks would show up to watch it. It wasn't until BR was released on VHS, Betamax & LD formats, that did it attain a cult movie status as the years went on by (same could be said of John Carpenter's 1982 "The Thing" movie as well).

If you watch the Blu-Ray Director's Cut of BR, it was a seven year frame-by-frame restoration project in it's entirety -- definitely a labor of love.

I've had the pleasure of watching the 2007 Director's Cut of BR shown on the silver screen (it's even better if it's the 35mm print version indeed). It's never gets old (at least for me, despite having watched it numerous times over the years). I had a VHS copy of the original 1982 BR movie but it was labelled the "International Version" with some slight differences (compared to the theatrical version of BR shown in the USA).

Director Ridley Scott has expressed interest in doing a proper remake of BR down the road.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[Xyga]

and best ambassadors of their specific (sub)genres and era.

Tarkovsky's Solaris is pretty up there..

Oh yes. Definitely.

[Moniker]

You'll find even more disdain for 2001 A Space Odyssey.

That one I like. Blade Runner looks awesome, but I just fall asleep every time I try to watch it.

Oh, c'mon, Jesus. Those two movies are like fucking perfect. BR's Director's Cut/Final Cut are the only ways to watch, though.

As for the original Solaris, my only criticism is that it's *too* beautiful. I'm probably one of the few who liked the Clooney remake.

[CMoon]

You'll find even more disdain for 2001 A Space Odyssey.

That one I like. Blade Runner looks awesome, but I just fall asleep every time I try to watch it.

Oh, c'mon, Jesus. Those two movies are like fucking perfect. BR's Director's Cut/Final Cut are the only ways to watch, though.

As for the original Solaris, my only criticism is that it's *too* beautiful. I'm probably one of the few who liked the Clooney remake.

Just a few thoughts:
1) Both 2001 and BR are examples of what cinema could be like before all movies had to go through the corporate round-table BS that started in the mid 80's and still persists. I don't think Blade Runner is perfect, but instead of aging, the film keeps getting better--and I think that's a reflection of how shitty the hollywood system is now. That said, there's always been piece of shit movies, but where are the 'director's vision' sort of films anymore? ...and that's why movies stink now.

2) Solaris and Stalker are the only two Tarkovsky films I've seen, but they belong in another camp. I don't know if Tarkovsky makes 'movies' per se, but instead makes cinematic experiences. His films are DEEPLY beautiful and ponderous and most of what you are supposed to experience is happening inside your head instead of on the screen. The funny thing to me is that Solaris has been called the Russian 2001, but again, 2001 is closer to being a traditional movie...somehow. I'd have loved to have seen both directors collaborate, since Kubrick and Tarkovsky were both masters, and had some shared values.

[boagman]

You'll find even more disdain for 2001 A Space Odyssey.

That one I like. Blade Runner looks awesome, but I just fall asleep every time I try to watch it.

Oh, c'mon, Jesus. Those two movies are like fucking perfect. BR's Director's Cut/Final Cut are the only ways to watch, though.

Sorry, but I'm in the category of the "BR is boring" group. I've tried to watch it multiple times, and I have no problem spotting its aesthetics or what-not...but as a vehicle to draw you into the story, quite frankly, it stalls. Perhaps BR isn't as bad as the original "Tron", but it sort of has some parallels to me: visually impressive, but boring-as-all-get-out to actually *watch*. There's a difference between "seeing" and "watching", and neither BR nor "Tron" make the cut as to be worth "watching".

[Obiwanshinobi]

Solaris and Stalker are the only two Tarkovsky films I've seen, but they belong in another camp.

Watch Andrei Rublev.

[Some-Mist]

And The Mirror which has recently grown on me to the point of being my favorite. Solaris and Stalker are by far his easiest to watch imo.

[Obiwanshinobi]

I found all Tarkovsky films easy to watch. Not always a compliment (many Chinese films are audiovisually rather digestible, yet kinda embarrassing when you switch brains on, then there's Dario Argento...), but The Mirror seemed shorter than most and as such technically easier to take in.
It helped great deal that I managed to watch Tarkovsky movies theatrically. There's no kill like overkill.

[Skykid]

Heresy in this thread.

Blade Runner is film noir, Decker the Joe, Rachel the Jane. It's meant to burn slow as a detective piece, replacing 50's art deco Chicago with a neo LA dystopia.

It does get better with each watch, and I've probably been through it twenty times, so at this point - within its independent sphere and sci-fi subgenre - it's nigh-on untouchable.

[boagman]

Heresy in this thread.

Blade Runner is film noir, Decker the Joe, Rachel the Jane. It's meant to burn slow as a detective piece, replacing 50's art deco Chicago with a neo LA dystopia.

It does get better with each watch, and I've probably been through it twenty times, so at this point - within its independent sphere and sci-fi subgenre - it's nigh-on untouchable.

No heresy here. Slow burn can be good. Never heating up is a problem.

[Skykid]

Never heating up is a problem.

I completely disagree.

[boagman]

Never heating up is a problem.

I completely disagree.

Well, to be absolutely clear, I should amend my statement: Never heating up before I completely lose interest due to boredom/slow-as-molasses plot development, is a problem.

And we can agree to disagree without being disagreeable. I've given BR enough chances to redeem itself before I finally just gave up on it, and this is coming from someone who genuinely likes that era of Harrison Ford roles.

[Aleksei]

Just saw Joe, it was exactly like Mud.

[Mischief Maker]

You see, this is what I knew was going to be the result when they added that "hold piece" function to Tetris. We've raised a generation who thinks Blade Runner is boring because Deckard doesn't wear vintage 2004 Converse All Stars or punch replicants with his ironic robot arm.

Comparing Blade Runner to Tron is like comparing Alien to Mac and Me.

[blackoak]

Tarkovsky's Solaris is beautiful, one of my favorites. But I understand Stanislaw Lem's dislike for it too. Tarkovsky injected his russian mysticism into what was an archly rational novel. Based on what options wrote, I can't imagine him liking Tarkovsky's Solaris, but the novel is required reading for anyone with a passing interest in sci-fi.

[boagman]

You see, this is what I knew was going to be the result when they added that "hold piece" function to Tetris. We've raised a generation who thinks Blade Runner is boring because Deckard doesn't wear vintage 2004 Converse All Stars or punch replicants with his ironic robot arm.

Comparing Blade Runner to Tron is like comparing Alien to Mac and Me.

You're completely right, except for, you know...everything. Other than that? You're gold, Jerry.

[Skykid]

Comparing Blade Runner to Tron is like comparing Alien to Mac and Me.

That gave me a full belly laugh in the middle of a Korean shopping mall food court, surrounded by civilised, beautiful, quiet people.

I suddenly feel very foreign.

[drauch]

Yeah, that was pretty good. Maybe the only Mac and Me reference I've ever seen. Cheers to that!

Still yet to see Solaris myself. Stalker put such a bad taste in my mouth (sorry, Cmoon) that I've yet to watch anything else at this point. I've got a handful of his stuff on my list to watch, and I'm obviously not that ignorant to completely ignore him, but I'm a bit hesitant.

[Obiwanshinobi]

Tarkovsky injected his russian mysticism into what was an archly rational novel. Based on what options wrote, I can't imagine him liking Tarkovsky's Solaris, but the novel is required reading for anyone with a passing interest in sci-fi.

The novel is "gothic" compared to The Invincible, but I don't consider either a particulary good Lem book. Better than The Chain of Chance, but it's not saying much. For such a skillful writer, Lem had some soft spot for pretty shit literature (Nabokov, Dick) and sometimes it seems to me as if he tried hard to write a shit novel by himself (never quite succeeding).

I don't understand what about Tarkovsky's "mysticism" was particulary "Russian". If there's any distinctive "Russian mysticism" I heard of, it's eschatological (anticipating the coming of Antichrist).

[lilmanjs]

Solaris.
I did not, nor have I actually seen the one everyone is currently talking about, but The one with George Clooney in it. Still A pretty nice movie that really is outshined by one of the best movie soundtracks I've ever heard. Cliff Martinez really did a hell of a job on the soundtrack and it shows. But yea, I really do like the movie, though I don't know how it stacks up with the Russian one.

[Moniker]

Solaris.
I did not, nor have I actually seen the one everyone is currently talking about, but The one with George Clooney in it. Still A pretty nice movie that really is outshined by one of the best movie soundtracks I've ever heard. Cliff Martinez really did a hell of a job on the soundtrack and it shows. But yea, I really do like the movie, though I don't know how it stacks up with the Russian one.

IMO, the Hollywood version was going for pure psychology, whereas the Russian one was going for pure beauty. This is a simplification, obviously, but I think both films have their merits, even if the former is merely 'very good,' while the latter is a classic.