OMG you are right. What a brilliant observation, thank you. Life imitating art. Time to die.

yeah man. that's good observation.

He is immortalized with Roy Batty.

I had no idea about that coincidence. That really gives one cause for pause. Wow. He brings so much to this role!! The importance and pivotal meaning that consciousness plays in the Universe. This movie will never be displaced from my number one choice of all time.

Oh, but they will. Like everything human. And I truly believe that was his point. His passing around the same date was indeed poignant but poetic. Did you guys know that he wrote the last half of that soliloquy himself? The original lines were awful.

+matthew woodall this film was so ahead of it's time it's ridiculous.

Binary Domain is arguably more relevant than this film

Movie is based in 2019

We’re closer all the time.

@@alexkfridges it still is.

When has Vangelis /not/ sealed the deal?

Agree... and visuals and the atmosphere.

If this movie was nothing else but vangelis sound track and beautiful scenes, i'd still watch 3 hours of it

Yes but the photography is also insane. I come from classical painting (oil, brushes, canvas - yeah some of us still exist 😊), and the framing of every freaking shot is a masterpiece in composition, color theory, layering, etc.

Yeah, I agree it matters, and to be honest, him not being a replicant is central to the story and what it says about being human (Ridley Scott's words aren't worth shit on the issue, he didn't write the story, nor the screenplay, so he doesn't have authorial authority. Even if he did, it's questionable if that would matter though, The Death of The Author and all that). I interpret the unicorn-scenes as showing how similar to replicants humans actually are; how there really is no difference between natural and engineered life and the ending is about Decard realizing that, and choosing to fight for the rights of the oppressed even though he himself isn't one of them. Having him be a replicant cheapens the finale and his choice to abandon humans for replicants.

André Felippi Well,it matters for the sake of the sequel

Yep, he's still alive so not a replicant

+Pentti Koivuniemi I think Deckard is a replicant, but he thinks he is a human, so it does not cheapen his choice.

André Felippi Thank you! This has always been my thought on the matter!

+Phoebe Louise Honestly that scene makes me tear up a little bit every time I see it. So beautiful. One of the best scenes in movie history :_)

+Phoebe Louise i always saw it as a existential spiritual moment as Roy Batty accepts his death he realizes the temporary nature of all existence of all life within the world. the nature of time, it is true for us all that every memory and moment of our lives " will be lost like tears in the rain" and in that acceptance he finds existential connection and value in life, in his true empathy he displays unconditional compassion and saves dekard, i see it as his most human moment, in that moment his tears ( his memory's and all that he is,) and the rain are one, and time & death and will wash them away as non distinct as water, as his memories and all that has made him and distinct individual are no different in time than the rain drops that wash away his tears, and like us all time will wash it away.. a profoundly poetic and beautiful metaphor for the illusory nature of individuality the self and the temporal nature of this life

+Phoebe Louise It always seemed to me that he was saying his memories will die with him, and thus the records of those events he described. They, his memories and those events, will blend together and become indistinguishable in the long past, like tears in rain. His tears mean something to him, but the rain is indifferent, and so it all washes away together. I suppose it has multiple meanings though.

Ezra Carson Very well put :)

Ezra Carson That's what I love about the scene, the multiple interpretations of it are pretty endless

And he also has a song called "Rain and Tears" (in the group Aphrodites Child). Not in the movie, but just a fun fact

​@@viktorvondoom9119 wow

Yes yes yes. It's absolutely the best marriage of a musical score to a film that I can imagine .

honestly real, the emotions i felt during this movie made me cry, been diagnosed with depression ever since, #lovebladerunnerforever

*EVEN THE MUSIC makes my skin flush with emotion* So you're not a replicant is what you're saying.

Well that's what the music is meant to do I grew up with the Blade Runner soundtrack and when I heard the first note of Tears in Rain in 2049, it immediately brought a tear to my eye

same here. Vangelis is a f**king genius

Why...do....people....think....pauses.....are....more.....dramatic

Probably the best of all time.

but why would she symbolize an angel?

symbolism for the sake of symbolism as far as i can tell. But thinking deeper about it, she used to live high up in the sky, only to fallen down to earth, being hunted and killed by human. Think about it...

Mot to mentioned she get kicked out of the sky because she with her friends rebel against their higher rulers, that fact make them become lucifers, which make the ending even better when one of them symbolize jesus

no i haven't either, everything i got is from the movie

Paolo Chavez let's hope it isn't

He was my hero since I was 10 or 11 :/

That my friend is art. Rip

Fuckkkkk dude

It was his time to die

You know GD well it is

I think Batty's speech is existential, nihilistic. I agree with you. That's why I said he resigns to his identity, rather than accepts it. His identity, for at least the end of his life, was defined by longevity. He had little, he wanted more. I think Batty was trying to find a way to come to terms with the fact that all lives are short compared to eternity -- but he still wanted more.

I think I hear what you are saying. Nihilism runs strong in the film and genre it created. I think what I admire about your examination of that line is that you embrace the ambiguity, where as I had just took it as a conclusion instead of considering the questions it could possibly raise. It's thought provoking stuff like that makes me enjoy your videos so much. :)

Also of note: "tears in the rain" was ad-libbed!

Oh wow. I didn't know that!

+MajorGeneralPanic it wasn't ad libbed it was shortened and re-written by Rutger and approved by the director. Ad libbed makes it sound like he just made it up on the spot...which is wrong.

That’s because it’s more appealing than actual Los Angeles in 2019

Woah

Oh god DAMN it

+LEISURE OPTIONS Holy smokes... that's just mind blowing. A whole new dimension has just been opened. Thank you.

Wayne Simpso

i think there's much more of heidegger... blade runner is an existentialist movie directed by an existentialist author: it's time to die = it's time to become really human... it could be possible a marxist (atheistic... ) interpretation of the movie, as far as a christian interpretation too... but the greatness of this masterpiece is existentialist...

+Jeff Jefferson Jekovsky A lot of it has to do with the film lens. Some older films didn't use great film lens, but if you look at Kubrick or Ridley, they always used state of the art camera lens. It's not the only thing, but it's a huge aspect almost no one talks about.

Most of the design work was based on Syd Mead's concept art. He's a visual futurist who excels at extrapolating from current technology where technology will go. Because his work is so influential it helped inspire modern design which is why the film looks so modern. It's considered required viewing in a lot of architectural schools.

The other comment is right, the lens has allot to do with it. What also probably helps is the fact that this movie uses allot of deep blacks, which helps the camera to pick up greater details. Also the Final Cut version of the movie had a digital restoration proces in 2007. If you want another example watch The Game, from 1997, with Micheal Douglas. You will notice that the image quality is almost exactly the same as House of Cards years later. (both are directed by David Fincher).

MrPinbert Yup, very true that the masters' works will always age better than a guy who's just competent but doesn't have full mastery of the tech. Even in 1997 The Game stands out as a movie that looks so clean compared to other flicks at that time. It helps that these guys shoot for complete sharpness and full approval over the film processing, color grading. Sad to say but many directors don't know or worse, don't care.

Simply great craftsmen ship, it's why Quentin tarintino wanted the hateful 8 filmed in 8mm. If the director wants to make their movie timeless they'll pull in their best guys to do the job. The sets, editing, lighting and of course all the equipment is always top notch for its time, and in reflection to ours. Awesome cameras have been about for many years which translates the material forever

Totally agree. The human/replicant question has never really been that interesting to me, particularly in respect to Deckard.

I think it's important that Deckard is a replicant since it represents humanity's struggle with itself. By viewing Deckard, Rachel and Batty through the replicant lens gives us more insight into the nature of our own humanity than if any of them were human. They are "more human than human". If Deckard isn't a replicant, then it just turns into the totally nihilistic story of robots vs. humans.

Yes, but in our 2050.

Projekt:Kobra Agreed. It’s not exactly a bad film but there really isn’t enough there to pick apart for a case study

Projekt:Kobra You’re not supposed to talk about it!

Projekt:Kobra Why? Did you ask questions?

@Projekt:Kobra She's kind of there. And a movie doesn't become shit if you refuse to understand and invest in it.

+oldfrend the verdict is a great movie though!!!! Sidney Lumet was a master director.. But yeah all those other movies are ehhhh.

It's a great film but it's depressing as fuck.

To be fair, the theatrical version was ruined by the cop-out happy ending and pointless voiceover.

Mattchester ruined is a bit strong of a word i think. lessened, sure. but even as a kid, before the director's cut was ever released, i knew bladerunner was better than the crap that most of the critics loved.

Tbf, E.T. is a special film to a lot of people, i'm not a huge fan but it's undeniably iconic

Will do.

Nerdwriter1 Why you don't have millions of subscribers is beyond me. Keep it up! =D Amazing!

fine fine i just don't get around to reddit all that much

***** I know. It's a big ask. And I sort of hate when other creators ask me to do this. But if the video gets shared, and more people watch, it really does translate to me being able to do more of this Nerdwriter stuff. And Reddit is the ground zero of internet sharing. I appreciate it, William. I really do.

Do keep on making these. You make my day week after week and I couldn't live without them. will upvote you hesitantly :)

This was absolutely spectacular, man! Great job!

Fantastic video with great insights. Absolutely would love more! (edit: joined reddit just to upvote!)

One of the best movies ever, IMHO. Also, one of the few novel adaptations that diverges so much from its source material, and yet still manages to stay true to its spirit. Not to mention, it's just f'n gorgeous.

Joseph Piazza Fucking gorgeous, indeed.

did u really put hashtags in a youtube comment section

In the book, Deckard struggles a lot after killing the equivalent character Luba Luft, because Deckard watched her sing in an opera and despite the cold, uncaring desolate city he occupies - and despite false emotions thrust upon him by the mood organ, he felt truly moved by her peformance. After he killed her he couldn't help but wonder if what he had done had truly made any sense, even if Luba Luft had been an android, what is the difference?

Dreams, yes.

Agreed.

Yes but the thematic from bebop is a bit different Its more jazzy in the sense that it portrays life in a broken but perseverant state, it shows How life always moves on Even if we as individuals cannot

+d3xLP 's Sci-Fi Channel Actions films today are so fast and shaky I can't see shit at all.

Not all Sci Fi movies have always been like BR or 2001, and there's nothing with "easy" movies like that. But I guess we should demand big corpotations to make more intelligent movies right?

ex machina was gud. so was INTERSTELLAR and...idk Lucy? it's only once a couple of yrs we get a gud sci fi flick.

"Her" is tecnically a sci-fi and also "Another Earth" , but yeah the Sci-fi business has been pretty slow

"My name is Max. My world is fire and blood."

+undertakr: "I also saw Blade Runner in 35mm last year" Where?

Hollywood Theater Portland Oregon

Axe and Shield Stanley Kubrick is the best director to ever live.

Axe and Shield Chaplin was the first famous actor and a pioneer to say the least. Kubrick was a cinematic genius -- very obsessive over his shots and choreography. It could also be argued that Alfred Hitchcock was the greatest as well....

Nah. More like worst movie ever. None of the emotional themes he thinks are there, are in fact not there. It is a bland, inconsistent, boring mess

DerNeuere, worst movie? It's a great movie and that's why it has 100% on rotten tomatoes, 8.2 IMDb and 89% on metacritic.

DerNeuere Was...that a double negative?

Cheers, Kip.

#83279 random guy Yeah, i'm little scared to, but denis villeneuve is great and Ridley scott is implicated in the movie, so i'm optimistic

I knew i wasn't the only one who noticed that

@Charles the Movie Guy interlinked

Just watched the movie for the first time. It does not hold up in my opinion. A lot of the acting, writing and editing is extremely questionable. But it opened up a genre and defined a new aesthetic. I appreciate it for what it signifies, but it is not a good movie by today's standards, in my opinion.

It has a very odd way of telling the story. Many odd traits to characters and motivation. Still love it though.

I recently watched both movies for the first time and I think that it does have some moments where I thought “who is that, where are they, why are they there?” But in the end I loved the movie because I mostly understood it as whole.

It’s good to know I’m not the only one who felt that way. I only grew to appreciate it after watching videos like this that broke it down. In my opinion the movie could have used more dialogue, not the phoned in voiceover but at least a bit more context to the characters and their actions

bad movie but perfect piece of art

mikeylikesit100 he got old? lol

he tried to shake off the blade runner's spells. you know how great works often jailed the creator. stop to compare his work and enjoyed it as their own merit :v

Man, the level of ego in this comment Lolz!! Amazing!!!

*To start with films are subjective* Oh god, not one of these people.

mikeylikesit100 if you think the counselor was a bad movie you have missed the entire point lol reply to me whe you watch it again but this time with zero expectations

+Diente de Pollo Welcome to the world of art critics ! Say anything earnestly enough and it sounds like you know your "-isms" inside out.

I disagree... I think real artists have to think about all this. But it doesn´t mean their own interpretations are the most accurate. Also, it's art, so it is meant to generate different meanings, different explorations and possibilities. I think he (nerdwriter1) is good at presenting some of these possibilites to a broader public, as companion pieces, and give depth to the work of art. In this sense, helping the rest of us to look up for new stuff in these and other works. Generally speaking, works of art could be considered "imperfect works" by design. Artists and directors don´t need to be perfectly aware and "conscious" of what they are making, specially considereing art is so subjective, but, I believe, they have a level of cognition not entirely made out of words, but premonitions, actions, of senses, an extra sensibility which words were not yet made for. That's why art kinda exists. Yet, it doesn´t come from devine inspirations, rather concrete experience. So artists, the director must have tried this in other different ways. The director must have thought of this, just, not in the way we think he did, maybe uncounsciously.

very much a like frankenstein (the book mind you). very agreed with you, and it seemed...no one else thinking the same as us?

And? That that point of view is recent doesnt make it any less valid nor dogmatic. Its always “mUH POstMODErnisT maRXIST prOPagandA” with you fools, you are as sheepish and easily swayed by reactionary points as you paint OP out to be

@@Milk-jy1kn It's an invalid point. What he said is factually incorrect. You don't see the "upper class" at any point during the movie. You literally saw one company executive and that's it, how do you know the rest of the upper class which lives away from Earth isn't diverse?

There is no doubt the argument of a homogeneous ruling class is made in this film. Being woke wasn't created in the 2010s. Get over yourself.

There's a very similar scene in The Conformist by Bernardo Bertolucci, which I believe is one of the greatest films ever made. I think that either the director or one of the screenwriters must have been influenced by it.

condicending, but full of loathing to the ones that was ignorant and naive...always felt the eerie, unconfortable and curious everytime i am rewatched this movie

Nurlinda F Sihotang I love the noir mix with scifi of this film. not alot of films are like that.

***** yep. Many dark humour there

yeah, what?

Final Cut is the best version. The director's cut is not even really a directors cut, since Scott was not involved (he was busy shooting Gladiator, so they based it on notes and what the editor said the original cut was like). The Final Cut is the actual Director's Cut. The Final Cut is also the version with the best image quality.

I think all versions have their merit, even the original release with the cliché detective voiceover. Many fans are secretly happy with all these versions because it gives them something to become totally *nal about. Just watch whatever version(s) you can lay your hands on and let them speak for themselves, although comparing them IS of course still good study material about the art of film making. Imagine 3 versions of Esenstein's Battleship Potemkin existing. Oops, just went *nal myself! :-)

Marc Brassé I actually wasn't a fan of Ford's voice over. What made blade runner so good imo was The eeriness and the voice over took away from that. The final cut is by far the best imo

The voice over reaches back to the 40ties film noir detective theme which is also present in Rachels make up and hairdo, the One More Kiss My Dear song and other aspects of the art direction. To call it a forced Hollywood graft on is therefore part of the, actually even more artificial, myth building. But again: My argument simply is that all versions are more then O.K. even if one might have personal preferences.

I actually prefer the director’s cut. Has most of all the added elements, without the color altering and bumped up contrast. I can clearly see more details in the world much better in the Director’s Cut DVD compared to the Final Cut Blu-ray.

+valinor100 Is it really that simple though? I don't know enough about philosophy, but can you really just paintbrush it as a West Vs East thing? Surely there were Western philosophers who disagreed with the mainstream school of thought

Flynn Gumshoe There were. David Hume proposed that all experience consisted of 'bundles' of phenomena that is very similar to the Buddhist concept of 'aggregates.' Although he may have had contact with Buddhist ideas at one point in his life.

Cheers, Derek. I've seen it umpteen times too.

So happy you're happy you found it.

I prefer it, too.

Contrary to many, I also think the narrated version has another subtle line of continuity that draws me deeper than Scotts version(and the happy ending appeals in a film so full of unrequited darkness. the book is quite a bit different, more mental, as Phillip K is(was), than physical). I also edit out the 'gratuitous' violence, but not all. I appreciate the aspect to aspect feel(as NW exposes in his analysis of Ghost in a Shell). It melts me, like tears in rain.

My reasons for disliking the original cut are these: Harrison Ford's acting on the voice over lines is incredibly flat, the voice over lines don't add anything to the film's story, since anything they tell you is either already mentioned in the opening text or obvious from context, and the happy ending, while heartwarming, is tonally out of place after the bleak outlook Roy's death scene leave us with, while the excuse given for the happy ending was flimsy at best and thus not believable at all (she's "special"? "No termination date"? Why? That runs counter to everything we've learned about the replicants and the Tyrell Corporation). Lastly, the film's point is wrapped up with the reveal of the origami figure (whether it refers to Deckard or Rachel, which might change based on the version) and the recollection of the line "it's too bad she won't live, but then again: who does?" That leaves us thinking about the difference/lack thereof between humans and replicants, which is what the film is all about and follows well from Roy's death scene. There's no reason to continue from there to the added scene, nothing more is added to that central theme and instead it just distracts from the message, even directly harming it by juxtaposing the "then again: who does" line with lines about how she'll get to live after all. I can understand wanting a happy ending, but the specific fate of Deckard and Rachel is left hopeful enough in the Final Cut without detracting from the movie's themes.

I loved the happy ending.