FAQ  •  Login

Zhora/Leon sequencing in Final Cut

Moderator: dmohrUSC

<<

ghost of 82

Rookie Rep Detect
Rookie Rep Detect

Posts: 48

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:03 pm

Post Sun Oct 07, 2007 7:33 am

Zhora/Leon sequencing in Final Cut

Question for Charles please, if he wouldn't mind answering something thats been bugging me for awhile.

Its the whole sequence involving the Zhora chase/Leon fight. Now I know that when it was shot, Deckard fought Zhora, then stumbled into Leon, was saved by Rachel, and then bought his drink. When Gaff taps him on the shoulder, you can clearly see Rachel waiting in the background over his shoulder, out of focus. Thats why Deckard looks so nervous- has Gaff seen her?

Because of how the sequence was re-edited, it resulted in the cut on Deckard's cheek bringing about a continuity problem which has been 'fixed' by the Final cut's digital tweak. But is Rachel still there, albeit out of focus, before Deckard fights Leon and therefore before she turns up and saves Deckard? My question really is why the sequence wasn't re-edited to match the original script? After all, if the problem of the number or Replicants quoted by Bryant is fixed, as I believe it has been, then the sequence could have (should have?) been reinstated per the shooting script?

I just find it weird that Charles/Ridley have gone to the trouble of digitally removing the cut on Deckard's cheek when a re-edit of the sequence would have fixed the continuity problem anyway. Especially as Bryant's line about Deckard looking lousy is precisely because, if sequenced properly, he has fought Leon as well as Zhora. Also the tension regards Bryant's assersion that Rachel is now also a target is heightened because the viewer 'knows' that Rachel is nearby in the crowd and has just saved Deckard's life, creating a conflict in Deckard.

My question then is really why go to the trouble of a cgi fix when a re-edit back to the originally intended sequencing would have fixed it fine and improved the tension in the film. I had hoped that the Final Cut would have repaired this sequence but it seems not.

I know this probably seems nerdish but I love the film and this sequence has bugged me for years.
<<

Kipple

User avatar

Honorary Member

Posts: 1266

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2001 6:00 pm

Location: Satellite 2

Post Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:04 pm

You've got a good point there "ghost of 82". The original intention, as you pointed out, would have been more dramatic.
Image

Return to Special Edition - Final Cut

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron