Bladerunner sucks

Without using the "Tears in the rain" scene, show me one other point in Bladerunner that had any significant emotion and depth to elevate it above a popcorn flick.

(Hint: You can't)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=4lj2ISTrfnE
youtube.com/watch?v=Umc9ezAyJv0
archive.4plebs.org/tv/thread/92469268/#92471381
twitter.com/search?q=Sup
twitter.com/cmdrsvn/status/897611355351592961
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

2049 Sup Forumsirgin mad that no one thinks his movie is as good as the original. next!

Nearly all of Deckard's scenes lead up to that moment.

this one right here youtube.com/watch?v=4lj2ISTrfnE

The snake lady’s death.
The “”””rape”””” scene.

"Tears in rain"

Not "Tears in the rain"

tyrells death you absolute pleb

rachel looking at old photos

I agree with you op but you're going to get shit on.

The majority of the original blade runner is garbage.

>tfw I'll never see that scene for the 21st time again
WHY EVEN LIVE?!

youtube.com/watch?v=Umc9ezAyJv0
If you have Sup Forumseddit sensibilities you won't understand it
it's more of a Sup Forums, /lit/, Sup Forums and /ic/ sensibility scene. it's why you redditors think the new version is good

rape scene

>shakes? i get em all the time. part of the business.
>i'm not in the business...i am the business

The scene where he's conflicted about killing a person he had no reason to feel conflicted about because he didn't know her and never showed conflict before that moment in the movie? Yeah, great scene.

Sentimentality without any actual substance.

redditors praise and cirlejerk over the original even more my dear friend, it's on par with the fight club circlejerk

shut the fuck up mong

What elevates Blade Runner is it’s aesthetic—both visual and aural. The plot is straightforward detective genre.

Stay there with them then? You're not on Sup Forums authentically so you won't be missed

That guy's acting is horrible and the point of the scene is obvious from the get-go because it's obvious to the audience that he's a Replicant. There's no tension, and the way the test is administered doesn't actually show the audience the way Replicants in ways that come back around to the way that character acts throughout the rest of the movie. It's not a bad scene, but it feels like fluff because there's no point to it beyond doing the basic job of establishing that character and how he's different from humans. The problem is that he's obviously different from humans, to the point where the test is unnecessary because there's nothing that makes that character feel like an ordinary human.

Can't handle the fact that the original Blade Runner is the quintessential reddit film eh?

Aesthetic is all it has beyond Rutger Hauer's character. The Replicants all feel like robots, which makes their supposed ability to blend in unbelievable. Deckard is a weak character with flimsy motivation to change, love, and internalise the things happening around him; the movie fails to humanise him or make me understand how he thinks and feels. Rachel is a pointless character and Sean Young/Harrison Ford played terribly off of one another. The themes about "What is a human" are never driven home by the substance of the movie's story, and that was partly because Deckard was underwritten to the point of having basically no personality. The acting by every single Replicant is stilted, and a big part of the motivation behind Rutger Hauer's actions is that he's afraid of dying; but we never see him in a state of fear. We never see any Replicant in the movie in a state of fear about their mortality. So that theme is worth less than toilet paper because of how little they actually did to prop it up with solid writing or direction.

No I can handle it, but I'm saying you should go back and especially if you're going to make posts like "pick any of your favorite films and i'll find them on reddit" posts and then cry about hipsters when you can't

Rachel's delusion of being human is the same as K's delusion of being human. When she realized her childhood wasn't her's she started to cry. There was a scene after that, where she desperately asked Deckard if he ever tested the machine on himself. She questions the Voight-Kampff machine is indeed fool proof, because she still refuse to believe that she is just a replicant. Also Roy Batty's killing of Tyrell is just as emotional because he express his sadness for his own being and hatred for his creator for how unfair it is for giving him such a short life. Leon's line: Painful to live in fear, isn't it? is him telling Deckard how horrible it is to be a replicant slave.

Fuck off, reddit

oh so you can't handle it got it

I just said I can The problem is redditors like who come here and pretend they're locals whilst showing they're not.

see you still whining in a BR2049 thread 5 years from now

She asked him those questions before knowing she was a Replicant, and we never dwell on Rachel's emotional state beyond emotionless, detached shots of her looking at pictures of people the audience doesn't understand a thing about. It's much more interesting seeing it from K's perspective because we understand his emotional state and feel what he's going through.

And we never see Roy Batty in a state of fear. Him killing Tyrell for vengeance makes sense, but I never bought the fear angle because we don't see him in a state of distress a single time in the entire film. He's not hiding, or running, or sweating, or crying. He's stone-faced until the last 30 minutes of the movie where he unravels. And then all of the character exposition is thrown on top of a character the movie failed to make me understand for an hour-and-a-half. There are basic things the movie could have done to humanise him. And they missed every one.

Acts 1 through 3

5 years? People like you won't be posting on Sup Forums in even 3. You jump from whatever board is "kool" with the mexican twitter meme crowd

user this is becoming ridiculous, we are having the same exact argument with the same exact posts in every single thread
archive.4plebs.org/tv/thread/92469268/#92471381

And now I say "sure thing kiddo, people said the same thing to baneposters 5 years ago, and here we are"

It's melancholy she expresses, knowing her life is a lie the entire time have put her in a state of depression. You can see she's being crying from the smeared make up.
Roy didn't feel fear because he was free at this point. He felt fear during his time of being a slave. Also Roy's crazy behaviour at the end is him having a psychotic breakdown with grief and anger seeing her girlfriend mercilessly killed by Deckard and him feeling death nearing incredibly close.

>sure thing kiddo, people said the same thing to baneposters 5 years ago, and here we are
No one said that about baneposters 5 years ago because it was spammed by one guy initially. After 2013 it picked up steam with Sup Forums because they needed a new home after being chased out by their janitor, then in 2014 it went huge because of the tom hardy raid.

Again you would know this if you weren't a board hopper following mexican meme groups as stated before.

I never really got that impression with Rachel, because her relationship with Deckard fueled a lot of her emotional responses to things happening around her. I think my problem with her as a character is that we never see her express herself. Her thoughts and feelings are trapped. But it's weird to me because she's so vocal about everything else. The reason she is drawn to Deckard romantically isn't really clear and feels like so many other generic romances, and it's like the movie uses her to represent a theme instead of being an actual person.

Also, Roy was supposed to be feeling fear all the way up to the point where he saved Deckard's life. Like, the character arc is great. And Rutger's performance is great. But it's really hard to discern what triggered him deciding to let Deckard live, especially when the whole point of toying with him was making him experience the fear that Roy felt; but we never saw Roy express that fear, so it was weird.

I always saw Deckard as a stand in for the viewer, he’s pretty much just a plot engine to keep things going. I wouldn’t try to look to deeply into Blade Runner honestly.

>didn't even link the original post
So much for your autism.

Also I don't live in degenerate countries like mexico or america so dumb things like twitter or meme groups are not a thing here.

I just prefer the sequel because it actually feels like people are perceiving the world around them and reacting to it with passion and wit. The original feels very cold, but that's a problem I have with a lot of Ridley Scott movies. I'm not even a big fan of Alien despite how much I appreciate its production design and visuals. Like, the damn thing is certifiably a masterpiece of horror filmmaking just for being wildly different and being insanely atmospheric and having some of the most interesting sets ever put on film. But emotionally and intellectually, it does practically nothing for me. I feel a little guilty about that, actually.

Why would I link the original one if this discussion is about how it went though it's spam phase?
>Also I don't live in degenerate countries like mexico or america so dumb things like twitter or meme groups are not a thing here.
You don't need to and chances are they are which is why you're here in the first place

People with depression are lot less vocal and withdrawn because the sadness they feel is emotionally taxing. As K point out in 2049, she was attracted to Deckard the moment she met him and the reason she was so vocal before her realization is she wants to see what kind of man he is. She retreats to Deckard because she's emotionally vulnerable but feared intimacy because she's confused over her state of being.

almost no one in the entirety of europe uses twitter whatsoever, let alone "mexican meme group", whatever the fuck that is

I get that. But Rachel was vocal and active throughout the movie. It feels like a contradiction that's never really addressed. And I'm not sure that explanation actually tells us about her emotional response. Why Deckard, specifically? She seems aloof and detached from him frequently and the sex scene left me incredulous. What do they want, or get, from one another?

I'm sure you don't, tourist. twitter.com/search?q=Sup Forums.org%2Ftv&src=typd

I haven't seen the movie for a while so I'm gonna check on that, all I remember is the scene where she's in Deckard apartment and how silent and withdrawn she is. Indeed why Deckard, because Wallace has been wondering about that too, but to me it was love at first sight.

Find a single non british european there

Rachel and Harrison greatly disliked eachother on set. So...

It doesn't matter if actors hate each other on set because they are playing a role when the shooting starts. That's what actors do, they pretend.

I guess that's part of the problem. That, and Ridley Scott has never been at providing direction for his actors.

Eh, I should really re-watch it myself. I don't completely dislike the movie despite my problems with it, I just think this kino status it has here and elsewhere is a little confusing. Can't deny how amazing the movie looks, or how well that futuristic jazz score works for the neo-noir style of the movie. But the story underwhelmed me.

twitter.com/cmdrsvn/status/897611355351592961

Yeah but I think the problem is that hate translated to their representation of the Deckard-Rachel romance. It seemed to me like they lacked chemistry.

awooooo

Oh man you actually wasted all this time and found it, I congratulate your autism. Now find someone from Poland and you win

I understand, it's alot less exciting than the sequel. I like it because how comfy it is, because it has a dream like atmosphere thanks to Vangelis' score.

Yeah I can respect that.

So thats where you're from. This explains a lot about your lack of taste or authenticity to this board

Have you seen a single Kieślowski film?