BladeZone's Off World Forums

Posted: **Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:42 pm**

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... rch=Search

The longest vid is their original review.

Of course, years later, they rereated it, so smart move there.

Posted: **Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:35 am**

I love how Ebert calls them Repliconts.

Posted: **Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:23 am**

I alway's hated these guys. They have always both come off as more interested in themselves than any film they ever saw.

And didn't Siskel have a track record of hating sci-fi films? I thought I read somewhere that Siskel fairly consistantly gave a thumbs down to sci-fi flicks.

Ebert is a geek at heart I think, so I'm not surpised he found some joy in the film.

Interesting though. Gotta love You Tube!!

Posted: **Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:11 pm**

as much as i want to hate Roger Ebert...hes a smart guy. Just check out his comentary tracks on Dark City, Citizen kane or Casablanca....smart guy for sure.

Posted: **Wed Apr 04, 2007 1:35 am**

"This film is a waste of time... pretty to look at, but a waste of time"

...please, someone retire that f*cker!

Posted: **Wed Apr 04, 2007 5:11 am**

though i disagree with both of them i will say this....the changes made to the u.s. original thatrical version are pretty bad. do they ruin the movie...maybe. i honestly didnt take the film seriously till the directors cut. then again i was rather young in the 80's

Posted: **Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:55 pm**

They ruin it in the same sense that a musician hits the wrong note a few times during a performance. It may be a lovely performance, but those wrong notes too away from the overall piece.

Posted: **Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:10 pm**

i was born in 80 so i was obviously verry young when it was first released. I recall watching the film on vhs as a child and thinking it was cool but something bugged me about it...couldnt quite put my finger on it. I had for the most part forgotten about the film till a buddy was showing me his laserdisc collection one day in like 10th grade. I ran across the directors cut and we decided to give it whirl. I loved it though i had not known exact what had been changed (having not seen the film since i was like 8 or 9) He explained that the v.o. and happy ending were removed amongst other changes. It was remarkable to me how much better the film was now with these changes (though i found out later that this was not in fact Ridley's real final cut)
I remember even as a child thinking that Harrison sounded forced doing the v.o. kinda ruined the whole thing. Not having that alone was what did it for me...and the d.c. ending was perfect as well.

Posted: **Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:58 am**

Planta wrote:"This film is a waste of time... pretty to look at, but a waste of time"

...please, someone retire that f*cker!

Here's a direct link to that review.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vMCRofn_98

FYI: He (Gene Siskel) did retire. He died in 1999.

Posted: **Thu Apr 05, 2007 9:37 am**

Kipple wrote:
Planta wrote:...please, someone retire that f*cker!

FYI: He died in 1999.

ouch!

Posted: **Thu Apr 05, 2007 10:17 am**

"The facts of life."

Back to the review...for the opener, they showed, imo, the worst scene in the movie (The Deckard/Rachael "Love Scene"). Also, Gene being unable to contain his dissastisfaction with the film during Roger's time, coupled with Rogers' mispronounciation of Replicant, was a tad irritating.

But...on a positive note, Roger did appreciate the special effects, and made a point of complimenting Douglas Trumbull's efforts. :wink:

Posted: **Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:07 am**

There are always misconceptions about complex stories. Remember the audience members of AI who thought that the AI robots were aliens?

It happens.

Posted: **Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:54 am**

citizenchris099 wrote:i was born in 80 so i was obviously verry young when it was first released. I recall watching the film on vhs as a child and thinking it was cool but something bugged me about it...couldnt quite put my finger on it. I had for the most part forgotten about the film till a buddy was showing me his laserdisc collection one day in like 10th grade. I ran across the directors cut and we decided to give it whirl. I loved it though i had not known exact what had been changed (having not seen the film since i was like 8 or 9) He explained that the v.o. and happy ending were removed amongst other changes. It was remarkable to me how much better the film was now with these changes (though i found out later that this was not in fact Ridley's real final cut)
I remember even as a child thinking that Harrison sounded forced doing the v.o. kinda ruined the whole thing. Not having that alone was what did it for me...and the d.c. ending was perfect as well.

Sorry, but that's not it. The only reasons why you readjusted your opinion are:

1) You watched it again - many people have changed their mind the second time they watched Blade Runner. Welcome to the club.

2) You were no longer a child during the second time. Blade Runner is a mature sci-fi film. The "complex" themes in Blade Runner are lost on children.

When you showed your bafflement to your friend, he told you that it was a different version, a director's cut. At that point, you have decided, with the help of your friend, to put the blame on the studio rather then on childhood.

BladeZone's Off World Forums

The original Siskel and Ebert Blade Runner review on Youtube

The original Siskel and Ebert Blade Runner review on Youtube