As the talk of potential sequels to the classic sci-fi picture (click on link to see our original review of Blade Runner) ensue the director Ridley Scott has plenty to talk about. Especially the more people want to talk to him about his anticipated sequel to Prometheus.
Recently he has been quoted as verifying that Deckard is in fact a Replicant and we will get clarification in the sequel. This bothers me because I feel like it is simply catering to the popular myth from the movie. Given more than 30 years have passed without that question actually being answered I am even more certain that this turn in direction is simply to satisfy all those who just really wanted to believe it.
I am a fan of the movie and also read the book by Phillip K. Dick, not that it mattered what happened in the book at all. I do not feel like it was even possible for Deckard to be a Replicant despite Scott’s recent comments or the thirty plus years of speculation.
The main reason being this; if Deckard was a Replicant, he was the worst made robot of all time. Throughout the movie he literally gets his ass handed to him time and time again. He only survives the actual Replicants by the skin of his teeth and in fact gets lucky pretty much every time he faces them.
So my question is, how is a Blade Runner who can barely handle the real Replicants supposed to be one himself? Had Deckard actually been a Replicant wouldn’t he have been able to go toe to toe with these human looking machines with more ease and efficiency? His job is literally to hunt them down and he has so much trouble defeating them. Not only that but had he been a Replicant one of his peers should have been able to spot him. In fact when the Replicants show up on Earth Deckard is actually the second choice to find them as the first was murdered during the Empathy Test (going off memory, I’m pretty sure that’s what it was called).
No, Deckard was much too human with his oh so human attitude of rebellion against authority and lust after the Replicant Rachael. I will be excited over the sequel regardless and look forward to whatever they come up with but I just think this turn in direction is a cheap ploy to get people more invested. They are finally setting the record straight on the matter but I think they are submitting to popular opinion rather than doing what they originally had in mind.
Sound off with comments if you have any thoughts of your own on the matter.
Year: 2012
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof
RYAN’S REVIEW
I actually made it out to the theater to see this film. A privilege that’s becoming rarer and rarer as life gets busier but back in 2012 we found time to see a few and this was one of them. I thought it was excellent and in fact I wrote down my initial reaction in a post that’s some three years old now. Geez where does the time go? You can read my initial reaction below in its entirety:
6/10/2012
There will be a more in depth review of this film when we get to the “P’s” in our movie collection because we will own it. I just really want to share a few thoughts with our readers because we just watched it and I think everyone should know how great it is.
I think the marketing for this movie was incredible. The previews show you a lot of excitement without giving any hint to exactly what the movie was about. That type of advertising reminds me a lot of Inception from last summer because it did something so similar. It was very effective too because it builds anticipation for the movie while leaving a lot of surprises for you at the same time. When I sat down to watch this movie I had no idea what it was really about. I went in knowing only the basics and that it was a prequel to Alien. I knew within the first five minutes that I liked it and that it was going to be awesome. Some movies manage to convey that immediately, it works both ways though. More often than not I can tell in the first few minutes that a movie is going to suck, but I’m glad there are still movies like this coming out that can actually surprise me.
I do not think this movie would have worked without Ridley Scott behind the camera. I think that he is the only person that could actually make this movie and blend it so well with the original. Everything looked so great and in the same fashion we saw over thirty years ago. It has been a long time since Scott went back to his roots to make a Sci-Fi picture but he obviously still has the talent that made him a legend in the beginning. This movie will probably be very successful and I hope that success means we might see more of this to come from Scott. As of right now I am going to really hope Scott comes back into the genre strong and does exactly what he did for it thirty years ago with Alien and Blade Runner. Scott left a lasting impression on the genre and his films are both legendary. Scott has made many great films throughout his career but I think it is rather obvious after this film that this is where he truly belongs.
The cast all did an outstanding job in this movie. Michael Fassbender was specifically good, I think his role called for the most acting to be done as the android and he did it really well. His face seemed so implacable throughout the whole movie and he spoke with such a great tone. I am not a fan of Charlize Theron but she did an excellent job as well. I think she was well suited for the role and appropriately cast. Idris Elba was great too; he played a smaller part but still managed to be a badass. I think Noomi Rapace did very well as the lead; she could quite possibly be the new generation’s version of Ripley when all is said and done. Rapace is mainly known for playing Lisbeth Salander in the Swedish version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoomovies. One way or another I think we will be seeing a lot more of her after this. I think Guy Pearce is wasted in this movie; I had to come home and look up the movie on IMDB just to figure out who he was. I’m OK with that though, if he has to be in a film this great the less we see of him the better.
Overall I think this was a great movie and I hope I have encouraged all of you to give it a chance. There aren’t many movies coming out these days that I think are worth your money to make the trip to the theater. I can attest that this film is without doubt worth the ridiculous price of admission at theaters these days. We watched it in 2D because we aren’t risk takers when it comes to 3D but if the 3D effects were good I would imagine this movie looked great in the format. If you watched the movie in 3D please let us know how it looked because if we make it back to see it a second time we might try it out.
6/18/2015
Now back to 2015. I never heard a response about the 3D effects in this movie but I am still glad we didn’t see it in that format. 3D films continue to come out but I have no more faith in them now than I did in 2012. Until James Cameron finishes the next Avatarfilms I will be inclined to keep my four extra bucks and watch a regular version I can trust. If you want more on how I feel about 3D films just check this out.
Pretty much everything I said in my initial reaction still rings true. Noomi Rapace of course hasn’t become the next Ripley of sci fi but there is still potential for that in the future. Otherwise I still feel like she is exceptional in this movie, and I’m surprised it didn’t lead to bigger things for her, or hasn’t yet at least.
I remember there being a lot of talk about the opening scene of the movie. It’s vague so I can understand why so many people questioned it and what it meant in the movie. I didn’t give it that much thought actually. I saw it as a form of creation and didn’t question it because I think such things are and should be beyond us. Once we figure out how to do whatever that sculpted albino alien was doing we’re most likely doomed as a species. I think the process of creation should be beyond our understanding no matter how it was done, be it God, the Big Bang, or some sort of advanced albino alien science. I saw this scene as nothing more than a suggestion that alien intervention started life but didn’t think the ‘hows’ or ‘whys’ mattered very much. When you focus only on the ‘hows’ and ‘whys’ sometimes you lose sight of what ‘is.’
Despite my affinity for comic book films I would not call myself a sci-fi fan in general but only on occasion. When a sci-fi movie is exceptionally good I make exceptions because regardless any genre when something is awesome it simply ‘is.’ This movie stand out to me as an example of just how good sci-fi films can be. It’s a genre filled with every nerd’s fantasy and too much of what is made doesn’t have the muster that a film like this has. This movie is top to bottom sci-fi and it’s as good as anything the genre has to offer, I think so at least. In my opinion this movie deserves its spot among the other greatest in the genre, the Aliens and Blade Runners, Star Wars and the like. I have patiently awaited the sequel to this film but haven’t been fulfilled in that anticipation whatsoever. It’s still on the docket and slated to be released in 2016 but there seems little movement on it and I’m not even sure if Ridley Scott is involved anymore. That would be a waste because part of what makes this movie great is that it is simply the beginning of something bigger.
I mentioned many of the actors in this film in my initial response. I won’t go through them all a second time but I do think a couple are worth note. Michael Fassbender continues to impress as an actor and I really hope to see him in this role again. As David he is just outstanding and truly believable as a robot. His is such an interesting character with unknown motives and an intelligence to be feared. The only other actor I wanted to cover again was Idris Elba. He carries a coolness in his very presence and he is a badass when there is action at hand. Stringer Bell was my favorite character on The Wire and I seriously like any opportunity to see Idris Elba in anything.
While I love the sci fi part of this movie I also appreciate how it echoes Alien with elements of horror. The scene with the alien snake like thing is enough to turn the toughest guy in the neighborhood white. Snakes, generally make everybody uncomfortable. In this case it’s a mutated alien snake that will crawl right into your mouth and down your throat while you are screaming. If that scene doesn’t get you then I name you a liar who closed your eyes to hide from the horror of it all. If that scene wasn’t enough to make you cringe then the procedure Noomi Rapace endures when she births a monster it certain to put you over the top. Coupled with perfect timing is all hell breaking lose in the dock bay with a former character no longer who he was. Scary and exciting as it is it only leads to more intrigue as the movie begins to come together. Mr. Supercool Idris Elba gets it, he knows what the problem on this planet is but after that insight all kinds of answers start spilling out.
This movie is intentionally vague, it leaves it for the viewer to figure certain things out. I like that about this movie because I love the ones that make us think. That’s the way a good science fiction film should be and this is easily my favorite of the genre in quite a while. With hope, we see an equally as exciting sequel in time that only leads us further down the rabbit hole. As of right now Prometheus 2 is still slated to come out next year with a release date in March. I hope that holds but the clock is ticking now for that kind of deadline and Michael Fassbender has become such a busy actor these days.
Obviously I think this movie is well worth your time and if you haven’t seen it then you are missing out. This isn’t the only movie working in the Alien universe these days as there is a new sequel to the Alien franchise being worked on by Neil Blomkamp. The news coming out about what he is working on seems really interesting and looks quite cool. Blomkamp and Signourney Weaver worked together recently on his latest film Chappie and the two have collaborated together on the new sequel. It’ll be exciting to see what they are able to come up with. With a double dose of the Alien universe coming to the big screen in the next year, hopefully, there is no better time to revisit this film and the Alien films. Aside from Alien 3 they are all exciting, even Resurrection with it’s ridiculous breath technology on doors was not a bad movie if you enjoy the franchise.
Year: 2007
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: Steven Zaillian, Mark Jacobson (article)
RYAN’S REVIEW
I thought I was wrong about this movie. I had seen it in the theater and wasn’t overly impressed but assumed I had to have been distracted. Nobody agreed with me and after so long I began to question my initial judgment. When I started it for the second time I found that I wasn’t in the mood for it and it sat on our shelf unwatched until I came up with this brilliant idea for a 4th of July themed series of reviews. I have now given it my best effort. I literally put in headphones and watched this movie completely consumed. I gave over 100% of the two most observant senses and gave the film my best effort, in the name of the 4th of July! However, while I can see why this movie appeals to others I just simply hate it. I feel like it is the most over exaggerated film cashing in on the pretext of being based on a true story. While I can accept that it is a good film I just don’t think there is anything that distinguishes this movie from other gangster films.
I know that this film is based on a true story. I am from the area Frank Lucas hails from and he was actually interviewed on local radio stations when this movie was coming out. I think it’s really cool to see a movie about a local guy that really hit it big in the seedy underground of New York but I don’t know about his portrayal in the film. All I’m saying is that Frank Lucas was not the Godfather and this movie is just all wrong for me. In so many ways it is just more of the same without anything to set it apart. I am a huge fan of Russell Crowe and I like Ridley Scott as well. I am not a Denzel Washington fan. Yet I find with this movie I don’t like Russell Crowe and I actually think Denzel Washington turns in one of his finer performances.
Of course the character of Frank Lucas is the better part. He is part Godfather and part Robin Hood in this film. Albeit this Robin Hood doesn’t rob from the rich to give to the poor. He offers herion at discounted rates, and this just messes up everything for everyone. The real mobsters don’t have the same type of quality heroin and they can’t buy it for what Frank Lucas is selling it to the consumer for. Boo Hoo and Blah Blah. The mega rich criminals have been robbed of an opportunity to make even more money and they have to pick on the kind and generous Mr. Lucas, who is just trying to do right by everybody with his generous nature, and reasonable rates on HEROIN. Gotta love the guy, this Frank Lucas is portrayed in a manner that is totally contradictory to his actions. I do appreciate his sudden and savage violence but that is only there to wake the audience up during what is otherwise a dismal film. I can’t stand the man with the noble nature who earns his fortune doing something so despicable. If you are gonna do it that’s one thing, but if you are going to do it you need to be Avon Barksdale or Stringer Bell and not the Don Corleone/Robin Hood we see in this film. No offense to Denzel, I think he was awesome in this part. I just think the part was a little over the top and poorly written.
Russell Crowe is an actor that never ceases to amaze me, but I just can’t see it with this performance. Granted he is great, he is a pro all the way and does his job well but I don’t think he does anything exceptional. To start with he plays the kind of character that nobody is going to like. Who is going to pull for the straight laced cop among all the dirty ones when he is going after a criminal you are set up to pull for? If you want to make Serpico make Serpico, but don’t put so much of the focus in a film like this on him because it throws off the whole film. I get that this is a story about both men but I think there would have been better angles to take that could have made a better film. You could cut half of Russell Crowe’s scenes and replace them something that builds up a different part of his character and achieved the same result. There is undoubtedly more to the man than simply his honesty so let’s note his honesty and move on to more of what makes him character worthy. You have to admit a role is bad if Russell Crowe can’t even make something out of it but I’m sure plenty of people will argue the contrary point.
I love gangster movies and typically find something to like about all of them but I have failed to do so here. I totally immersed myself in the film but cannot find myself wrong in my initial reaction to the film. I don’t think it does anything at all to distinguish itself and I think it is one of Ridley Scott’s weakest films. Denzel did a great job but he can’t save what just isn’t any good. I don’t know how accurate this movie is and truthfully I don’t think it matters. There is too much to the story that we simply don’t see and all this film offers are exaggerated highlights to something that undoubtedly has more to offer. This film threw a bunch of big names on the screen and sold us on the pretext that it was based on a true story. The key word in that, as always, is “based.” Sure there was a real Frank Lucas, I have heard him on the radio and know it for a fact, but I doubt this is an accurate representation of who the man really was and what he did.
I give this film two thumbs down and regret doubting myself enough to purchase it for the collection. If anybody I know personally is reading this feel free to text me if you want this copy. I think the movie is so bad I will freely give it to whoever will take it off my hands. In fact, if I don’t get that message I may just leave it on the curb with a note that says, “take me but watch at your own risk (your time will be wasted).”
Final note on the film: after writing all of this I did the most minimal of research to find that the movie is widely regarded as 99% false. Basically there was a Frank Lucas and he did sell heroin but beyond that nearly everything you see in this film is false. That only reinforces the hate I am developing for this film I wasted THREE viewings on. I can’t bare to have a friend take this off my hands, if you happen to see a copy left on the street with a note on it then you may be looking at the very same one I am about to throw out.
Year: 2003
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: Eric Garcia (book), Nicholas and Ted Griffin (screenplay)
RYAN’S REVIEW
Recently I saw an episode of Community that pondered the question “Nicolas Cage: good or bad?” I thought the whole thing was hilarious because when reviewing Cage movies in the past I have talked about how great he can be in some films and how hopelessly awful he can be in others. On the show the question proved to be too much for even Abed Nadir to handle. Scary stuff in truth because if Abed couldn’t handle it then not even Cage himself should broach the subject. Nevertheless it is a very compelling question about an actor who has made over 70 films in the last thirty years. It is interesting indeed to see an actor achieve the highest honor in film, the Academy Award for Best Actor in 1995 and follow it up the way he did. With his performance in Leaving Las Vegas Cage beat out Tom Hanks (who was going for his third straight win with his role in Apollo 13) and followed it up with The Rock. While I have always personally loved that film it is what it is, and I was twelve when it came out so naturally I thought it was awesome. The Rock was just a cheesy action movie but it wasn’t all that bad and it paired him with Sean Connery. More or less I think it was an acceptable idea for Cage to win such a prestigious award and then branch out into a new genre that was looking for new heroes as the regulars (Schwarzenegger and Stallone) were getting too old. However, then in 1997 he starred in Con Air…….now what is there to say about that one? A cool cast all around but Cage was so specifically bad in that movie it made the whole thing a joke. I actually referenced it specifically in our review of Lord of Warsaying that Cage could be great but you just never knew when he was going to do something like this:
Cage is certainly an interesting actor and maybe one day someone will succeed where Abed could not in answering that question posed by Community, but I’m not driving myself crazy trying to figure it out. I ony bring it up because when it comes to this film I don’t really think there is much more to talk about beyond Cage. It’s a good enough movie and everybody does their job well but as it goes with movies about con men the story is generally the same. If you have seen one you have seen them all because there isn’t usually anything fresh brought to the table. You might see some cool new cons but at the end of the film our characters have betrayed one another and the big shocker is not shocking at all. Despite that I love this film because I think it is one of the films that will make you lean toward “Good” when trying to tackle that unsolvable Nicholas Cage question. I think Sam Rockwell is exceptional in it and expected so much more from him after this. It has sadly been quite disappointing to see his career never take off quite like I imagined it would ten years ago. In this movie he is smooth and cunning as the protegé that has much more going on than he lets on.
I specifically thought Alison Lohman was incredible in this movie and like Rockwell I don’t know why it didn’t lead to greater things for her. Rockwell however has still found marginal success here and there while Lohman has fallen off the map completely, not acting at all since 2009. I read that she was twenty-two when she played this part and got the role by showing up to her audition dressed like a fourteen year old. Apparently Ridley Scott was surprised when he found out how old she actually was and obviously she made an impression with her audition. She had incredible chemistry with Cage and brought a lot to the film. I also relate to it more now maybe because I have daughters myself. The father-daughter aspect of the film really gets to me and makes the movie more significant to me personally. Regardless how it transitions into my fondness for Alison Lohman as an actress I still think it is unfortunate she isn’t out there making movies anymore. I think this film proves she has plenty of talent and hopefully one day she will be able to showcase those skills again.
Ridley Scott is a director you can have faith in. When he makes a movie you know it’s going to be made right and every once in a while one of them will absolutely blow you away. No director is without his busts and Scott is not immune. He has his fair share of films that weren’t successful but I think his successes far outweigh them. I have always considered him the better of the two Scott brothers. While I wasn’t specifically a fan of his younger brother I was still sad at the news of his passing a couple of years ago. He was a good filmmaker and it was an unfortunate loss. In this film Ridley Scott did a great job. He specifically pushed for the ending to correlate with the book in which Cage’s character loses everything. Producers didn’t want the “hero” of the film to end up like that and initially the script called for a different ending. I think Scott made the right call and compensated the producers with a final scene in which we see Cage has moved on and into better things. I like that ending better because his character didn’t deserve to win. As viewers we need to keep in mind that while we are enjoying watching this character he is still a seriously awful guy. Con men are piranhas that prey on the weak and feeble. There is nothing noble about them and every one of them out there deserves to lose everything and then be caught.
I don’t consider this film to be exceptional but it is entertaining and I enjoy it. Little else matters right? I may not be willing to tackle the unsolvable question about Cage but I will be the first to point out where he is “Good” as opposed to “Bad.” At the end of the day I am just more interested in appreciating what he is good at and happy to ignore what he is bad at. So maybe he takes an easy paycheck and makes a bad movie far too often. The man is in the game to make money and he isn’t getting any younger. Cage is great in this movie and I for one am happy just to appreciate his compelling and considerate performances. This is a cool movie and I think it is more than worth your time to see.
AMBER’S REVIEW
This is one of my favorite movies in our collection. I remember the first time that I saw this and thinking how great Nicholas Cage was in this movie. I found him to be incredibly believable in this role. I was drawn in and interested from the very beginning and I really like how the whole movie played out even in the end. This is one of those movies that not a lot of people have seen or even know about really, but it is a really interesting flick.
There is absolutely nothing exciting to me about this poster. I feel like someone used a few photoshop filters and effects and viola! you have…this. It includes the main players of the movie, which is good, but I really have no allusion to what this movie is about. It doesn’t even give you a reason to want to see the movie. The typography of the title is killing me. I really dislike it. I just overall really just don’t like this poster at all. I don’t think it does this film justice. I think a better solution to this poster would be to see Nicholas Cage smoking in his superbly clean house maybe beside the dog which shows some cash and the gun hanging out. See, now I am interested. I think this design is lazy.
Year: 2000
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: David Franzoni, John Logan, Willian Nicholson
RYAN’S REVIEW
“What we do in life, echoes in eternity.” I’ve always thought that quote was incredible and it set the tone for this movie. This movie blew everybody away in 2000 and won all the awards including Best Picture and Best Actor for Russell Crowe. I was in high school at the time and it set quite an impression on me. It immediately became my favorite epic film of the “swords and sandals” genre as I have heard it described. It had that effect on nearly everyone, it is a powerful movie. It’s about power, and revenge, and like all good “swords and sandals” movies it’s about courage and honor.
This movie made Russell Crowe a superstar, he had been on the rise for some time but this was what put him over the top. I think he has made many great movies since but in my opinion this was his peak as an actor. He might have made many great films since but none so great as this. As Maximus he commanded respect on and off the screen. I think people started to think that he was the great and noble character that he played in the film. I remember when he started beating people up in the real world it was such a shocker, but I happened to think that worked well for him as it encouraged me to see his upcoming film Cinderella Man. With this film Crowe used up the last of his youth, I have always felt he looked so much older since. I can say that he got the most out of it though, he gave a great performance that was due all the credit it got. Crowe has worked many more times with Ridley Scott but they haven’t been able to match what they did with this movie, although they have made some good films since.
As great as Crowe was in this movie I have always thought Joaquin Phoenix brought just as much to the movie. He was terrific as Commodus and despite all his problems he is a great actor. I am always afraid that there will suddenly be breaking news that he has died just as his brother River Phoenix did. Phoenix obviously has had serious problems with drugs, but he has always managed to keep it together for his movie roles. I think he thrives playing really complex characters and this film is no different. Commodus is a child in a man’s body, a little boy that desperately wanted his father’s approval and failed to achieve it. He is angry and cruel, he is weak but unpredictable in a way that makes him very dangerous. He has the power and nothing is scarier than power wielded by someone like Commodus. Phoenix lost the Academy Award to Benicio Del Toro for his role in Traffic. I have always thought that was a load of crap, the award should have went to Phoenix, he deserved it. I like Del Toro but you can barely understand anything he says and I have always thought Traffic was overrated.
This film is not even remotely historically accurate but I don’t think that matters, it doesn’t in any way claim to be based on fact. There was a real Marcus Aurelius and a real Commodus but none of this happened the way we see it in the movie, or at all. Richard Harris did a great job playing Aurelius. He has a noble aura about him that makes him great for roles like this. I think the Harry Potter films really suffered when he died, he was great as Dumbledore and left big shoes to fill. Djimon Hounsou was great as Juba. I thought bigger things were ahead of him when I saw him in this film but he hasn’t lived up to my initial expectations. Connie Nielsen looked the part and performed admirably as the lone female role in the movie. Oliver Reed also played an exceptional part in the role of Proximo.
This is a great movie and it will always be important to me for the lessons it taught me as a teen. Russell Crowe’s character of Maximus sets a good example for all young men. He is heroic and brave, he does what is right instead of simply what he is told, and he perseveres when things get difficult. Those are qualities that we should all study and take something away from. This kind of epic movie is the type that always appeals to me so I fit nicely into the target audience. If you like these types of movies then this is definitely worth your time, and if it isn’t your type it would still be worth your time to see it.
AMBER’S REVIEW
Some movies really speak to people and some movies don’t. This movie speaks to Ryan. I cannot say the same. I have tried to watch this movie so many times and every single time I get bored and stop paying attention. This is yet another movie that I don’t like that makes people look at me and say, “Really?” I don’t know anyone else that doesn’t like this movie, so I know that I am the odd ball out.
The scenery looks amazing and so does Russell Crowe, but like I said, I get bored every time. The movie poster for this movie is actually quite nice, however. There is a lot of symbolism. Notice how he is large compared to The Colosseum. They are trying to portray this idea that even The Colosseum doesn’t amount to this Gladiator’s glory. He is larger than life and can’t be stopped. The costume is perfect, the color is great and the typography of “Gladiator” is a nice serif font with an ever prevalent movie style texture to the font, which stands there just as boldly as The Gladiator himself.
There will be a more in depth review of this film when we get to the “P’s” in our movie collection because we will own it. I just really want to share a few thoughts with our readers because we just watched it and I think everyone should know how great it is.
I think the marketing for this movie was incredible. The previews show you a lot of excitement without giving any hint to exactly what the movie was about. That type of advertising reminds me a lot of Inception from last summer because it did something so similar. It was very effective too because it builds anticipation for the movie while leaving a lot of surprises for you at the same time. When I sat down to watch this movie I had no idea what it was really about. I went in knowing only the basics and that it was a prequel to Alien. I knew within the first five minutes that I liked it and that it was going to be awesome. Some movies manage to convey that immediately, it works both ways though. More often than not I can tell in the first few minutes that a movie is going to suck, but I’m glad there are still movies like this coming out that can actually surprise me.
I do not think this movie would have worked without Ridley Scott behind the camera. I think that he is the only person that could actually make this movie and blend it so well with the original. Everything looked so great and in the same fashion we saw over thirty years ago. It has been a long time since Scott went back to his roots to make a Sci-Fi picture but he obviously still has that talent that made him a legend in the beginning. This movie will probably be very successful and I hope that success means we might see more of this to come from Scott. As of right now I am going to really hope Scott comes back into the genre strong and does exactly what he did for it thirty years ago with Alien and Blade Runner. Scott left a lasting impression on the genre and his films are both legendary. Scott has made many great films throughout his career but I think it is rather obvious after this film that this is where he truly belongs.
The cast all did an outstanding job in this movie. Michael Fassbender was specifically good, I think his role called for the most acting to be done as the android and he did it really well. His face seemed so implacable throughout the whole movie and he spoke with such a great tone. I am not a fan of Charlize Theron but she did an excellent job as well. I think she was well suited for the role and appropriately cast. Idris Elba was great too; he played a smaller part but still managed to be a badass. I think Noomi Rapace did very well as the lead; she could quite possibly be the new generation’s version of Ripley when all is said and done. Rapace is mainly known for playing Lisbeth Salander in the Swedish version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoomovies. One way or another I think we will be seeing a lot more of her after this. I think Guy Pearce is wasted in this movie; I had to come home and look up the movie on IMDB just to figure out who he was. I’m OK with that though, if he has to be in a film this great the less we see of him the better.
Overall I think this was a great movie and I hope I have encouraged all of you to give it a chance. There aren’t many movies coming out these days that I think are worth your money to make the trip to the theater. I can attest that this film is without doubt worth the ridiculous price of admission at theaters these days. We watched it in 2D because we aren’t risk takers when it comes to 3D but if the 3D effects were good I would imagine this movie looked great in the format. If you watched the movie in 3D please let us know how it looked because if we make it back to see it a second time we might try it out
Year: 1982
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: Philip K. Dick
RYAN’S REVIEW
When Christopher Nolan got ready to start shooting The Dark Knight he gathered the crew together for a screening of this movie. When it was over he told them that this was how he wanted to make the next Batman movie. That was what finally got me to sit down and really pay attention to this movie, to recognize how great it really is. It’s weird but I intentionally avoided this movie for a long time. I had always heard how great it was but found it slow and vague when I tried to watch it. I would not call myself a big science fiction fan and this movie was always too much science fiction for me. What I mean is that I like science fiction intertwined with real life, a la Terminator or Jurassic Park. These movies are set in real-time and real life with fictitious elements of scientific nature. A movie like Blade Runner is the whole nine yards, it’s in the future with robots and flying cars and new technology still unknown like the Voight-Kampff machine.
It wasn’t just the heavy science fiction nature of the film that kept me away though, that isn’t usually a problem. This film is a thinker, and I have never found it enjoyable enough to give it that much effort. People are literally still debating parts of this film today, 30 years later. Was Deckard a replicant or not? Who knows? I don’t and while I can see the quality and excellence of this film now I still don’t like it enough to put that kind of time into it. This is the kind of movie you can watch 25 times and analyze over and over again but you have to love a movie to do that and I do not love Blade Runner. I merely recognize and respect it as a classic, I have heard some call this one of the greatest movies ever made. I can’t say I agree with that but I can see why people could feel that way, the movie is well made and iconic.
There was apparently a lot of tension between Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford on set during the filming of the movie. I think at times you can see Ford’s frustration and you can plainly see that he isn’t comfortable in the part. Sean Young is good in this film, though she would go crazy about 10 years later. I believe she confronted Tim Burton on the set of Batman Returns in a homemade Catwoman suit in an effort to win a part already cast, or something like that. This is easily one of the best performances from Daryl Hannah, she looks great as Pris. Rutger Hauer also looks great as Roy Batty, this is his best performance as well. This was very early in the career of Ridley Scott, he made this movie right after Alien. You could see early on that he was going to go on and do great things. Blade Runner looks great and it’s very visionary, but I find it boring to an overwhelming point at times.
You should watch this movie because it is a classic. It is worth your time to see it at least once. It can be hard to follow and if you are seeing it for the first time it’s easy to get lost or confused. I think that is because this movie has been released in so many formats. We own the four disc collectors edition, I don’t know what year, but that is only one of I think 6 or 7 editions of the film released over the past 30 years. However, if you can make it to the second half of the film it gets much better.
Just one final thought, on the Deckard debate. I can see why people would think that he is a replicant. Deckard dreams of a unicorn and Gaff makes the origami unicorn indicating that he knew what Deckard dreamed of blah blah blah. I don’t buy it though, Deckard is always getting his ass kicked. He is way too pathetic to be a replicant, all the replicants were badass and he was lucky to beat any of them. If he was a replicant wouldn’t he be designed and built with the capabilities to do his job better?
AMBER’S REVIEW
Oh my god, Ryan wrote way too much about this boring, boring movie. I have tried to watch it three times now and every single time I have fallen asleep. It is the most slow-moving movie in history. Every time that I would wake up for a little bit it would be on some scene playing some ridiculous music and people would be staring at each other hence making me fall asleep once again. This has got to be one of the most boring movies ever made. All I know about it is that Harrison Ford is a Bladerunner, who apparently is someone who chases down and recognizes who a “Replica” is, which is like a human replica that’s not really a replica. I don’t know what else happens but I just assumed at the end he was a replica himself. How is that for irony for a boring ass movie?
Year: 1979
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett
RYAN’S REVIEW
I hope I am wrong, but I think this movie will be lost on younger generations. It’s a fantastic movie but I’m afraid it might be too outdated to be appreciated in the future. There are those of us who will recognize this movie for the classic that it is, but we will probably be the minority in the long run. This movie isn’t as ageless as most classic movies. I think it’s hard for horror movies to remain scary when the genre is constantly trying to outdo itself. However this is just my opinion and I very well may be wrong. When I was a kid I actually watched Aliens first, and in hindsight this was a mistake. James Cameron made a very different movie, a better movie I think but not a horror film at all. When I went from the action/sci-fi sequel to its predecessor the horror aspect of the movie just didn’t register. I was expecting more of a movie with a similar action feel to it, and throughout the entire movie it never occurred to me that it was supposed to be scary. This is a slower paced movie, a pace audiences were comfortable with 30 years ago but don’t necessarily tolerate today.
I was a stupid teenager when I watched this for the first time and I couldn’t appreciate it. Watching it now I can see the horror, and understand the fear it must have invoked when first seen in 1979. This movie moves slow, but it was an imaginative original idea and it was very well made. This movie was one of the first ones directed by Ridley Scott, who has gone on to have an incredible career and is still making great movies today. One of the first roles for Sigourney Weaver, who has also gone on to have a fantastic career and still carries weight as an actress today. Alien won an Academy Award for Best Visual Effects and it was well deserved, the effects in this movie were ahead of their time. This is a great movie, so good that it spawned a franchise that Fox will probably continue exploiting it till the end of time. I hope you take the time to watch this movie, parts of the film move a little slow at times, but I can assure you that it’s worth your time.
AMBER’S REVIEW
For the time period, this movie is great. It has all of the elements of a science fiction and horror. I like all of the characters and the plot. The movie is thoroughly scary and creepy and quite disgusting in parts. I like it more almost knowing that it goes on and on in sequels still to this day.
I don’t have much more to say about it. It is worth watching, but it isn’t my favorite one to watch over and over.
The Movie Snobs 