View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE DVD Review provided by Humanities Commons
Blade Runner: The Final Cut
DVD Review with steven Aoun
2-Disc Special Edition or 5-Disc Complete Collector’s Edition. Directed by Ridley Scott written by Hampton Fancher and David Webb Peoples, US, 1982/2007, rated M, 117 minutes. Starring Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer, Sean Young, Edward James Olmos, M. Emmet Walsh, Daryl Hannah, William Sanderson, Brion James. DVD features include (depending on the edition) Dangerous Days: Making of Blade Runner (exhaustive 210-minute feature, both editions), 1982 theatrical version, 1982 international version, 1992 director’s cut, workprint, enhancement archive (collector’s edition only). it immediately. It was my own Runner’s screenplay was being Philip K. Dick urged that Dick’s guiding themes: progress interior world (and) they cap- rewritten (independently) by the guiding theme of his work is only possible through regres- tured it perfectly.’5 two people up until the final has been ‘chaos as opposed sion, and occurs by way of cor- Unfortunately, Ridley Scott take, and multiple versions to order … by which I mean ruption and loss. Quoting Henry had his own problems with the with different endings abound. flux, a necessary uncertainty – Vaughn’s metaphysical poem dream factory. Hollywood had The five-disc collector’s edition Goethe’s “element of chance ‘Retreat’, Dick ventures that little idea of what the director also confirms that replicas of that confounds the philoso- ‘some men a forward motion had captured on film and tried the various completed films phies of God and man”’.1 It is love, but I by backward steps to take it in another direction. have been in circulation. These interesting to see, then, that would move’.3 The visionary An intractable author became range from the workprint to the Dick thought he could tempt writer had inadvertently pre- the least of Scott’s worries theatrical (US), international and fate by making a deal with the dicted the film’s stilted produc- as he was forced to defend director’s cuts – some of which devil. Hollywood had somehow tion and (re)releases. Indeed, a film bearing his own signa- could have played in theatres convinced him that they would Dick was so concerned that his ture. We need not subscribe or on television near you at faithfully adapt Dick’s 1968 creation would get away from to the auteur theory to note different times. Blade Runner novel Do Androids Dream of him that he publicly denounced the director’s authorship here has therefore run the risk of Electric Sheep? into a movie. Hampton Fancher’s original – even Philip K. Dick retreats degrading itself in the process, Then they offered the struggling screenplay and refused to have into the background of Scott’s and begs the question: which is and ‘obscure’ writer a percent- any further dealings with the remarkable mise en scène.6 In the real version? age of the merchandising rights Hollywood machinery. Dangerous Days, the documen- Ridley Scott struggled with so long as he would agree to Suffice to say, Dick was tary accompanying the DVD, the issue of Blade Runner’s the ‘suppression of the original completely taken aback when Guillermo del Toro (director reality throughout the film’s novel in favor of the commer- David Webb Peoples’ rewrite of Pan’s Labyrinth [2006]) ob- (post) production, and invaria- cialized novelization based on was forwarded on to him. The serves that Scott had created bly tangled with cast, crew and the screenplay’.2 amended screenplay continued ‘pure cinema’ and provided studio alike – virtually everyone From the moment Dick to leave out most of the novel’s future filmmakers with a ‘life- was ‘ready to kill Ridley’.7 The signed the film rights away, key elements, but it had come changing’ experience. famous lead took exception Blade Runner threatened to into its own and reintroduced Nonetheless, Blade Run- to the film’s central question be stillborn and has remained ‘subtleties of meaning’.4 Dick ner was characterized by and was reluctant to get with in a constant state of flux and was also astounded by a seg- near-death experiences and the program. There was a near uncertainty. The film adaptation ment of Douglas Trumbull’s subjected to corrupting influ- mutiny on set when the crew was characterized by an iden- special effects for the film unex- ences. Creative differences felt like they were being treated tity crisis, and evolved by being pectedly encountered on the and compromised visions were like mere cogs in a machine. subjected to another one of six o’clock news: ‘I recognized the order of the day. Blade And when it was time to release
160 • Metro Magazine 157 ▐ Blade Runner’s screenplay was being rewritten (independently) by two people up until the final take, and multiple versions with different endings abound. ▐ Blade Runner into the world, it famously fell to earth. The mov- ie tested poorly and the studio Indeed, the fate of Blade Runner panicked by trying to make the is living testament to the creative film as unsubtle as possible. process and its place within the As Dick turned in his grave, the flux of experience. cious, they have also acquired ning bolt from the heavens fore- studio added a knowing voice- A belated ‘director’s cut’ greater relevance and urgency shadows, it is always raining over, excised a cryptic dream (1992) was more an oppor- over time. While it is possible to on this hell on Earth. It is hard sequence and implanted a false tunistic studio rush release, be misled by the deceptively to believe that anyone could memory via a conventional while Blade Runner: The Final straightforward script – a live here, but Los Angeles is an Hollywood ending (among other Cut (2007) is an attempt to bounty hunter is called out of overcrowded place divided into things). The dream factory did stabilize the film’s fluctuat- retirement to track down and big corporations and ‘little peo- its best to cheapen the original ing and misshapen identity. kill genetically engineered be- ple’. The social divide appears vision by trying to remember it This twenty-fifth anniversary ings – it simultaneously moves to have made the populace as for us wholesale. Considering edition provided Scott with an in a number of different direc- indifferent to the elements as the film was released under opportunity to finally salvage a tions. It is worth stressing that they are to each other. Looking false pretenses – marketed as a project shaped more by Edward the proposed finality is not to out for one another need not be sci-fi extravaganza and/or high Scissorhands than Philip K. be mistaken for a definitive take a concern in a world constantly voltage adventure – it’s no won- Dick. He was able to do this on the film; ‘final cut’ does not monitored and under surveil- der that critics and audiences via a digital restoration and imply ‘last word’. Blade Runner lance. After transporting us reached out to E.T.: The Extra minor tweaks. By restoring the has retained its indeterminacy into this dsytopia, the film ends Terrestrial (Steven Spielberg, original, Scott is taking viewers by remaining open to inter- abruptly by closing a door in 1982) instead. back to the future. Scott’s final pretation and discussion. The our face. It has to be conceded And yet the film has defied retreat invariably becomes claim to definitiveness is more that Scott’s vision of the future its makers by refusing to die a a celebration of the act of an attempt to bring extant ver- is a place viewers might not premature death. Confounding creation itself, and might even sions into parity, retrofitting the want to feel shut out of. The expectations, its resurrection restore faith in the medium. The film for an uncertain future. spellbinding visuals tend to coincided with the rise of the 1982 masterpiece somehow From the unforgettable have a hypnotic effect and machines: Blade Runner lived remains capable of conveying opening, Blade Runner ignites threaten to overwhelm char- on (in one form or another) with the shock of the new. Blade the imagination. The screen acters and audience alike. The the advent of VCRs and DVD Runner’s production design literally bursts into flames as pensive tone, however, dispels players. The film took on a life continues to be breathtaking. our eyes scan an urban inferno. any notion that we’ve entered a of its own in an adaptable mar- The film’s thematic preoccupa- Welcome to the City of Angels, cinematic utopia aestheticized ketplace and emerging zeitgeist. tions not only remain auda- November 2019. As the light- within an inch of its life. It is
Metro Magazine 157 • 161 DVD Review
ironic, then, that one of the big- in a city built on broken prom- parallel enquiries and dual (or Indeed, the opening scene gest complaints levelled against ises and unfulfilled dreams. A duelling) protagonists. Indeed, literally turns into a series of Blade Runner is that ‘films can’t culture clash manifests itself the film’s antagonists arguably questions designed to test for live by design alone’8 – this in the contours of the physi- become its main protagonists as ‘real’ emotional responses. argument is integral to the film’s cal landscape, where ruin and we also follow their lead and en- And the last line spoken is left own theme and teleology. decay are dwarfed by technol- quiries. They invariably befriend as an open question as two Yet the film is not without ogy and splendour. It is no a kindred soul – prematurely lovers are forced to embrace design flaws. Blade Runner wonder the media-saturated ageing genetic designer J.F. Se- the reality of their situation. The occasionally drags its heels culture offers the prospect of a bastian (William Sanderson) who film’s searching moves towards in places, and the emotional ‘new life in off-world colonies literally (and fatally) makes ‘toys’ two main themes: the nature distancing can be difficult to … a chance to start again in his friends. The film’s ostensible of identity and the problem deal with. The film is arguably a golden land of opportunity lead, however, always seems to of mortality. Felt experiences too reliant on Asian culture and adventure’. Essentially an be one step behind them and provide the connective tissue, when conveying its feeling of existential crisis writ large, the is curiously being shadowed while identity becomes a (dys) otherness. There is also a sex film’s quest occurs against a by someone (Edward James function of memory. scene that continues to raise background bringing cultural Olmos) second-guessing his One of the film’s more eyebrows – the more intimate questions to the fore. When every move. The blade runner mystifying developments is (deleted) love scene could have the blade runner (Ford) asks a finds himself sidetracked by the when (presumed) human and been reinserted in the final cut to suspected replicant (Joanna discovery that he might be fall- replicant only have eyes for resist accusations of misogyny. Cassidy) if she ever ‘felt ex- ing in love with another product each other. Deckard and Rach- Nonetheless, Blade Runner’s ploited in any way … like, to of the environment, Rachael ael falling in love might appear ability to convey information and get this job … did you do or (Sean Young). perverse or inexplicable, but mood in visual terms is perhaps were you asked to do anything Significantly, the script the script uses their relationship the most memorable thing about lewd or unsavoury or otherwise references William Blake’s to explore depths of feelings the film. Scott’s kaleidoscope repulsive to your person?’ he America, A Prophecy to criti- confounding humankind since of hallucinatory images – com- might as well be directing the cally comment on the fate of Adam and Eve. Most impor- bined with Vangelis’ evocative question to himself: soon after, the American dream. The repli- tantly, their ‘fall’ provides the score – situates us within a he is forced to shoot the semi- cants’ leader, Roy Batty (Rutger film’s vision of the future with world characterized by feelings clad woman in the back as she Hauer), deliberately misquotes, an old-fashioned counterbal- of displacement. As the lit-up runs for her life. ‘fiery the angels fall, deep thun- ance. By exploring the world pyramid readily attests, Scott The exotic dancer is not the der rolled around their shores, through each other’s eyes, it turns towards the past and only thing that falls to the earth. bringing with the fires of Orc’.9 intimates that love humanizes future to create a unique sense The City of Angels has clearly The implication is clear: the us all and offers true salvation. of time and place. The Janus- fallen too and dragged every- replicants see themselves as The ongoing attempt to resolve like approach simultaneously one down with it. We quickly fallen angels and have returned the mystery of Deckard’s ‘real’ draws on tropes from film noir learn that off-world replicants to defy the laws of their ‘god’. identity, then, is the real puzzle. and science fiction, creating a have descended on Los Ange- They have discovered that they Ridley Scott has perversely world (and genre) unmistakably les in order to meet their maker have a limited shelf life, and announced that Deckard is a its own. Scott announces this – a man who has presumed to that a ‘fail safe’ has been built replicant – even if Harrison Ford juxtaposition from the outset: play God. Tyrell (Joe Turkel) is into them to ensure that they (among other key personnel) the film seamlessly transitions not only the designer of beings don’t get ideas above their begs to differ. from an explosion of colour to that are ‘more human than station. When the ‘prodigal To some extent, their argu- low-key lighting. Blade Runner human’, but the corporation son’ (Batty) confesses that he ment highlights the fact that the transports us across frames of bearing his name appears to has ‘done questionable things’ question of Deckard’s identity is reference by simply following lord over creation itself. during his space travels, the beside the point within the con- a car to its destination – it is One of the most intriguing ‘father’10 (Tyrell) seals his own text of the film’s own account of headed towards the pyramid things about the film is that there fate by dismissing the gravity of human evolution. Blade Runner dominating the skyline. We are few conventional intrigues to the situation. The resulting kiss is not a jigsaw puzzle that follow the movements of a be found here. The film noir con- of death is particularly horrify- requires us to put various pieces ‘spinner’ flying speedily through vention of a detective investigat- ing in the final cut – audiences together – its challenge does not space to a man waiting in a ing a mystery – in this case, the might want to avert their eyes. lie in reassembling parts into a smoky room beneath a slowly whereabouts and/or motives of While the script occurs in complete picture. The picture spinning fan. replicants – is telegraphed to the an interrogative and speculative remains incomplete or moving Blade Runner’s depths audience in advance. The film is mode, it doesn’t presume to because it is the struggle over are reflected in its extraordi- configured around parallel inves- offer many answers. It merely identity that acts as the missing nary surface appearances. It tigations that invariably dovetail tries to navigate the grey area link. Indeed, it is the very act is where the truth is laid bare. into each other. Consequently, between appearance and of questioning that bridges An emotional landscape is Scott’s approach is both medita- reality. Particularly intriguing the evolutionary gap between projected onto the layers of the tive and mediative. The goal is is the way it lets metaphysical human and replicant. To quote screen – feelings of oppression to create a brooding melancholy questions play out between Ford’s account of the link: and degradation are embodied by establishing a link between the characters and situations. I thought the audience
162 • Metro Magazine 157 deserved one human being on shocking and necessitates a humbled and seeks out his own mortality can be traced back to screen that they could establish mercy killing. Batty’s death remembrance of things past by Scott too. According to the exhaus- an emotional relationship with. scene is among the most mov- running towards an uncertain tive Dangerous Days documentary, I thought I had won Ridley’s ing in recent memory, providing future. The greatness of Blade Scott’s brother died of cancer dur- agreement to that, but in fact a claustrophobic film with its Runner, then, is that it attempts ing pre-production, and Scott took I think he had a little reserva- only true emotional release. As to look audiences in the eye on the assignment to deal with the tion about that. I think he really importantly, the replicants appear and offers the real empathy grief. To be frank, it’s difficult not wanted to have it both ways.11 to be capable of establishing test – simply by testing their to interpret the film in light of this The problem with Ford’s real connections with each loyalties and sympathies. knowledge – Blade Runner’s preoc- thoughts (and Scott’s other – something the future 1/2 cupation with mortality is relentless. pronouncement) is that it has rendered a distant memory. ****It’s alive! 7 While this quote is attributed to presupposes the very things at The metaphysical question, producer Alan Ladd Jr., who was issue – namely, whether ‘hu- then, is not ‘who is what?’ The Steven Aoun is not a Nexus-Six describing Harrison Ford’s experi- man’ merits approbation and film’s central intrigue is that but one of the Final Five, and is ence with Scott, it also describes whether the label ‘replicant’ can the moral categories threaten chlorinating the gene pool as we the rest of the American crew’s clarify anything. ‘Deserves’ has to become blurred or inter- speak. • experience with their British ‘gov- nothing to do with it when the changeable, and that Blade ernor’. Dangerous Days describes a question of identity cuts both Runner places us at the nexus Endnotes ‘t-shirt war’ that occurred on set – ways and directs us to past and between them. The question of 1 Phillip Purser, ‘Even Sheep Can one where the crew communicated future simultaneously. These identity is complicated by the Upset Scientific Detachment’, Lon- their frustration with the director beings threaten to (d)evolve into fact that we’re asked to identify don Daily Telegraph, 19 July 1974, through slogans like ‘Yes, Guv’nor (conceptions of) each other, with the emotions of artificially pp.27–30. – MY ASS’, ‘You soar with eagles and the problem is adopting a created beings. The replicants 2 John Boonstra, ‘Philip K Dick’s when you fly with turkeys’ and ‘Will default position with respect become our surrogates in that Final Interview’, Rod Serling’s The Rogers never met Ridley Scott’ to them. Blade Runner ideally the very concept of ‘humanity’ Twilight Zone Magazine, vol. 2, no. (Rogers famously said he had ‘never leaves the audience similarly is problematized in the conflict 3, June 1982, pp.47–52. met a person he didn’t like’). struggling with the issue of between them. While it is ques- 3 Purser, op. cit. 8 Jordan R. Fox, ‘Ridley Scott Must humanity, one that resists a tionable whether they are ‘more 4 Boonstra, op. cit. According to Dick, Learn That Films Can’t Live By De- (dream) factory’s setting for human than human’, there is ‘I was just destroyed at one point sign Alone’, Cinefantastique, 13.1, user-configurable options. The little doubt that humanity has at the prospect of this awful thing 1982. function of memory invariably become less human(e) here. that had happened to my work. I 9 The original line is ‘fiery the angels becomes a red herring – it has Given the film’s mode of wouldn’t go up there, I wouldn’t rose’. never been a reliable source of inquiry, the issue of human- talk to them, I wouldn’t meet 10 One of the tweaks of the final cut is knowledge anyway. The real ity remains an open question Ridley Scott. I was supposed to be the alteration of a pivotal word. In issue is the way we process by retaining an evolutionary wined and dined and everything, the previous cuts, Batty demands, ‘I information or relate to our imperative. The humans have and I wouldn’t go, I just wouldn’t want more life, fucker’; in the final experiences. apparently devolved to the go. There was bad blood between cut he calls Tyrell ‘father’ instead. Ford’s insistence on point where they can only relate us … David W. Peoples’ screen- 11 Ford recounts his dispute with Deckard’s humanity also con- to each other as a means to play changed my attitude.’ The Scott in a television interview with veniently ignores the evidence an end, and seem unperturbed problem wasn’t so much Fancher’s Jonathan Ross in the BBC series on screen. The one-man by the possibility that they original screenplay but that he Hollywood Greats (4 April 2006). slaughterhouse initially feels might be committing murder. was constantly forced to rewrite Scott, on the other hand, insists that that he has ‘no choice’ but to The replicants have evolved it, turning it into something ‘aimed Deckard was always a replicant: Ted accept his assignment and to the point where they have at 12 year olds’ (to quote Dick). At Greenwald, ‘Q&A: Ridley Scott Has assigned value in the order of learnt to look out for each other one stage, Fancher also wanted Finally Created the Blade Runner He things. The apparently pow- and come to appreciate the to have his name off the film. It is Always Imagined’, Wired, 15.10, erless man then goes on to value of their own lives. This is worth noting that while Fancher and
Metro Magazine 157 • 163