3 ms·
Thinking about what was possible to make in 1982, it's pretty amazing. It's an absolute classic, up there with the best of the noirs (the actual film noirs), su
by kebman 4y ago
Thinking about what was possible to make in 1982, it's pretty amazing. It's an absolute classic, up there with the best of the noirs (the actual film noirs), such as The Maltese Falcon, Double Indemnity and The Third Man; the logical answer to the Neo Noir Body Heat the year before. It's like a legacy moving onto such things as Ghost in the Shell and even The Matrix.
- bsder 4y agoAnd I think that's why it flopped initially but has such staying power. Balde Runner is fundamentally film noir and the sci-fi is just the setting. The essential conflicts are human conflicts--not technological ones. You can replace the setting and you still have mostly the same story.
- deltaonefour 4y agoBut if you replaced the setting with a mundane one the movie would be a generic film noir. It only works because of the combination of the setting and the story.
- hodgesrm 4y agoI disagree. I'm a big fan of Chandler and his monumental creation, Philip Marlowe. Deckard is quite a different character. Just comparing the two, Deckard's role is to be a witness to Batty's dawning humanity (as well as Rachel's I suppose). I think that's one of the things that gives the movie the feeling of extraordinary redemption at the end. There's no such sense of redemption in Chandler--the Marlowe storylines revolve around the struggle to keep a moral compass in the midst of societal corruption, in line with the common definition of the Noir genre. [0] (I'm thinking particularly of The Long Goodbye but it's common to all the Marlowe stories.) Just my $0.02. It's definitely fun to think about. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noir_fiction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noir_fiction