I finally watched Blade Runner and i thought it kinda sucked. I think I understand the point...

I finally watched Blade Runner and i thought it kinda sucked. I think I understand the point, and imo iRobot made the point better than Blade Runner. Am I missing something?

Blade runner it's based on the work of Phillip K Dick.

Like in you are a dick.

Movie it's great.

Why do I want to sex this emoji

no you're right, it sucks. only the visuals are of any value

I watched the movie 3 times in the last 10 years and always end up dozing off.

I just saw Blade Runner.
The new replicants has to be the most impressive sci-fi robots I've seen in years. Literally years..
The movie itself seems to capture that 80s feeling we've seen in Stranger Things and other important work. Do your part and see it in theaters.

Which version did you watch?

My experience is exactly the same.

The movie is gorgeus nonetheless, just a bit too atmospheric. Reason why I always have dozed off at some point. I think I've seen pretty much all the scenes though.

not bad bait

8/10

It's perfect napcore, that's an ultimate testament to comfiness.

Stop this now. This copypasta is too dangerous

the fog and the film noiry sets?

I've never seen blade Runner, which cut is the best?

Not really a best cut, but at least Final cut removes the terrible narration. It does, however add a really stupid scene into the movie because Scott's a retard and doesn't understand his own movie

Thanks I'll give it a watch

Have you considered that replicants are not actually robots, that they are flesh and blood people (although not birthed naturally)? That is the point of the movie and the novel.

That you hadn't watched it yet tells me everything I need to know about you op. Opinion discarded

If they are manufactured, imo it doesn't matter what their insides look like.

It does. In the context of the story, they're called "replicants" rather than people and they are "retired" rather than killed or murdered. One of the questions raised by the movie is "What constitutes a human?" If one's consciousness were transferred to an android body, would that android still be considered a human and deserving of human rights?

Also, manufacture of replicants probably isn't like manufacture of cars or toasters. If we in the real world were able to clone humans, would those cloned humans be real humans and would they be entitled to the rights humans have? Put another way, would it be right to clone a bunch of humans and put them to work on the plantation as slaves?

No but it would be right to put them to work cleaning out the ghettos of niggers

>Comparing iAdvert to Blade Runner

The absolute fucking state of this board. Watch it a couple more times, then get back to us.

>cleaning out the ghettos of niggers
The earth is being heavily depopulated in the blade runner universe. Earth was a polluted radioactive wasteland, and anyone with a brain had moved to the offworld colonies already.

Ok Grandpa. I'm not saying I loved iRobot, I'm just saying iRobot did a better job of asking the question. Not "what does it mean to be human", but what does it mean to be a sentient, self aware, intelligent, etc.

Final cut 1982

It's one of the single most overrated movies of all time.

Ok, good to know. For moment I thought I had incredibly shitty taste.

>and anyone with a brain had moved to the offworld colonies already.

And yet super-wealthy people like Eldon Tyrell stayed behind. This was the same situation in the book and the book implies that the people on the colonies are very unhappy as it's a very harsh life.

this. It's literally fallout 4 level of basic.

It is exactly the kind of IMDB-core that redditors love. It manages to neither be compelling enough for a mass audience, nor hold any level of artistic merit. It's an elevated, boring popcorn flick and perhaps the apex of middle brow cinema.

iRobot couldn't even follow it's own story. One of the most unique things about the 3 rule stories is they are never, not once, broken. IT's more exploring how humanity would react to such technology without resorting to something as pedestrian as "Robots kill humans to protect them from themselves"

So of course the film pulled the "Robots kill humans to protect them from themselves" twist.

So it's boring.

Well, time for my first viewing of "Munich".

Well they fucked it up, because there was the world controlling super AI that when dealing with all humans on the planet it's potentials created the zero'th law, where people and robots can be harmed if it ultimately benefits everyone else.
It wasn't like they were exterminating people or anything, more like creating minor resource shortfalls in certain areas.
I agree though, they fucked up calling this iRobot, should have just called it "Future Cop & R. Obot" since no one who's a fan of the source material is going to like it, and normies don't know what the fuck an i, robot is so theres no name recognition.

People feel compelled to praise Blade Runner because it's the most prominent sci-fi film between 2001 and Gattaca. If it didn't exist we'd probably be talking about Silent Running instead.

Every single person in my family dozes off around about when the chick in the raincoat gets shot, and wakes up at tears in the rain.

Blade Runner was a cult film until le nerd culture journalists starting jerking off to it. It's a depiction of cyberpunk, one of the first, and it looks fantastic visually. Not that I would understand a redditor to get it. You just want an epic script with complicated plot lines. You do not appreciate the visual aspect of film.