BLADE RUNNER @ 924 BROADWAY

Fellow Film Club Members and Movie Buffs:

Perhaps winter has waned and spring is gently moving in; one can hope. This Friday, March 11, 2011 the Tacoma Film Club is excited to continue with our theme of “futurist’s nightmare” by presenting a screening of Ridley Scott’s landmark science-fiction film BLADE RUNNER (1982). This has been one of my personal favorites.’

Ridley Scott is considered the most successful British director working in Hollywood. He has directed 30 films and produced twice that number. He and his brother, director Tony Scott bought and still own Shepperton Studios in England. His first feature film was THE DUELLISTS (1977), and others I have enjoyed include ALIEN (1979), BLACK RAIN (1989), THELMA AND LOUISE (1991), 1492: CONQUEST OF PARADISE (1992), GLADIATOR (2000), BLACKHAWK DOWN (2001), and KINGDOM OF HEAVEN (2005). He has now worked with Russell Crowe in five films, including AMERICAN GANGSTER (2007), and ROBIN HOOD (2010).

He is trademarked for his stunning tableau visuals. He personally sketches most of his own storyboards, left-handed, and with great artistic style.

He said, “Hollywood is an industry, not an art form; where we find commerce overpowering art.”

The film score was done by Vangelis, who is well known for working with electronic and computerized music. He also scored CHARIOTS OF FIRE (1981), THE BOUNTY (1984), and ALEXANDER (2004). The team of special effects masters were over 100 strong. The cinematography was by Jorden Cronenweth, who died young at 61, lensing 31 films during his career; movies like ZANDY’S BRIDE (1974), ALTERED STATES (1981), CUTTER’S WAY (1981), and GARDENS OF STONE (1987).

Batty: Fiery the angels fell. Deep thunder rolled around their shoulders…burning with the fires of Orc. Quite an experience to live in fear, isn’t it? That’s what it is to be a slave.

BLADE RUNNER (1982)

Directed by Ridley Scott @117 minutes

The film stars Harrison Ford, Sean Young, Rutger Hauer, Edward James Olmos, M. Emmett Walsh, Daryl Hannah, William Sanderson, Brion James, Joe Turkel, and Joanna Cassidy.

Tagline: Man has met his match–now its his problem.

Based on the novel by Philip K. Dick, DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP.

Synopsis: In the Los Angeles of 2020, Deckard is a blade runner, a cop that specializes in terminating replicants–technology has evolved to human cloning, created to serve in the colonies off-Earth, but with fixed life spans. He is brought out of retirement to run down six rogue replicants who have hijacked a space ship and returned to earth complete with a cyber-vendetta against their creator.

Roger Ebert wrote, “The movie creates a vision of futuristic LA which is as memorable as Fritz Lang’s METROPOLIS–unimaginable sky scrapers towering over streets clotted with humanity.”

Deckard: They don’t advertise for killers in the newspaper. That was my profession. Ex-cop. Ex-blade runner. Ex-killer.

Peter Hartlaub of the SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE wrote, “Blade Runner: The Final Cut,” in limited theatrical release this weekend with a DVD box set arriving on Dec. 18, is the first version of the movie that truly seems like a finished product. The film is a few minutes longer, yet seems leaner, with a tighter narrative that is now worthy of the outstanding art direction and cinematography. This definitive print should be the last little push that “Blade Runner” needs to complete its 25-year journey from box office failure to cult favorite to full-blown classic.

James Berardinelli of REEL VIEWS wrote, “Blade Runner is a rare science fiction movie so full of material that pages can be written about it without scratching the surface. A review like this can provide little more than an overview. “

Batty: I have seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauer Gate. All those moments will be lost…tears in the rain. Time to die.

So join us this Friday, March 11, 2011 for a stirring screening of Ridley Scotts classic BLADE RUNNER (1982). It will be shown at our meeting hall at 924 Broadway, in the Pythian Temple, street level, across from the Theater in the Square, in the heart of Tacoma’s theater district. Show up early, around 6 p.m. and enjoying socialization and fellowship with other early arrivals. A sumptuous meal will be prepared by the Phantom Director and Farishta. Bring wine or soft drinks to share if you wish, but remember this is not a pot luck. The meals are planned out. We will continue offering the TFC raffle at one dollar per ticket, with the winners receiving either 40% of the collected revenue, or a fine DVD from my personal collection. Look for our huge club banner hanging out front. Make sure to join us for this film. It is one of the great ones. See you at the movies!

Glenn

 

Advertisements

About Glenn Buttkus

Former actor and Special Ed teacher for the blind, newly retired, spending my days struggling as poet, photographer, novelist, husband, and grandfather.
This entry was posted in Announcements, General Film Related Discussion, Glenn Buttkus. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to BLADE RUNNER @ 924 BROADWAY

  1. jim bynum says:

    the following, which relates to the well-known “unicorn riddle,” is from an article which i found online:

    In the movie Blade Runner, is Deckard a replicant?
    – – – –
    There is considerable evidence that Deckard is not a replicant.
    Deckard is thrown about like a rag doll by every replicant he scuffles with (with the possible exception of Rachael, who doesn’t try very hard). His ass is kicked even by Pris who was described as a “basic pleasure model.” If you were assigning a replicant to blade runner duty, you would probably pick one whose physical capacities were at least equal to those of a basic pleasure model.
    Deckard believes that he has quit the police force. He doesn’t like his bosses or coworkers, he has to be threatened into returning to work, and he is insubordinate to the point of allowing Rachael to escape. If you were programming a replicant for blade runner duty, you would probably make him more enthusiastic about his work.
    The memory-implant technology is new, but Bryant refers to Deckard as the “old blade runner” and acts as if they have worked together for a long time. Granted, this could be an elaborate lie (although why concoct a rocky relationship, see above) but at least it shows that if Deckard is a replicant, then the police know about it and are lying about it. The same police are sufficiently paranoid about replicants that they want to whack even the inoffensive Rachael as soon as Tyrell reports her missing. This does not jibe too well with them letting a new and experimental replicant roam Los Angeles with a badge and a gun.
    The coincidence of the unicorn dream and the origami unicorn is not exactly the same as Deckard showing off his knowledge of Rachael’s childhood memories. A recent dream is not the same as a childhood memory, and a unicorn is a single ambiguous symbol, not a detailed story like the two that Deckard tells Rachael. In other words, it could just be a coincidence, or show that Deckard and Gaff have similar taste in symbols. Gaff’s origami chicken meant, “You’re acting like a chicken,” not, “You dreamed about a chicken last night.” The unicorn could mean something like, “You’re chasing an impossible goal,” not, “You dreamed about a unicorn and I know about it.”
    Gaff does not say to Deckard, “It’s too bad neither you nor she will live, but then again who does?”
    Richard Mason

    i can also think of some questions, related in a slightly different way:
    if deckard is such a sophisticated replicant, why is rachael so special?
    how do we, the audience, know, empirically, that deckard remembers his dream?
    doesn’t noir, with its elements, such as darkness and cynicism, need actual human warmth at its heart, to be most effective?
    isn’t roy’s speech (and roy) diminished if it turns out he’s just preaching to the choir, after all?
    which is a more “enriched” scenario: a human in love with a replicant; a replicant in love with a replicant?
    isn’t the humor of the interaction between bryant and deckard greatly strained if deckard is a replicant?

    the contention of the author of the previous article is that deckard is arguably not a replicant. my contention, considering the arguments in the previous article, is that blade runner is a better movie if deckard is not a replicant.
    i think the following states a point of interest:

    from Off-world: The Blade Runner Wiki Themes in Blade Runner:
    When Roy Batty saves Rick Deckard, a replicant is saving a human. When Deckard falls in love with Rachael, a human affectionate towards a non-human. If replicants are hunting — and falling in love with — replicants, there is no ambivalence, and therefore, no conflict.

    other observation:
    my first-time viewing of the final cut last friday was a powerful and valued experience, and the above was my only clash with the movie.

    jim bynum (please remove this comment, if possible, after 60 days: i don’t want to be haunted by any unwisdom which it may contain. thanks.)

  2. Glenn Buttkus says:

    Jim, excellent research and conjecture, sir. Please read my ten page film review of BLADE RUNNER to be apprized of my views on whether Deckard was a replicant. The bottom line is that each of us has to make our own decision about that, and so many other issues and ideas. I love the fact that you were motivated to write up your feelings.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s