Saturday, March 18, 2006

Drugs? "Blade Runner?" No Need to Decide

Well, smack me in the face, stick a swizzle stick in my eye and stir my brain. Or make me watch "Blade Runner" again. Either way, the effect is the same.

You see, though I love movies and watch them all the time, for whatever reason I never saw this flick. They could also have called it "Pink Floyd's The Wall 2 with Harrison Ford". No need to spark up some Colombian red, just make sure you don't have to operate heavy machinery for at least 12 hours, pop it in the DVD player, make sure you have some munchies on hand, and enjoy.

I saw it on clearance at Menard's of all places, and took a flyer on it on the theory that since I'm among the elite group of only 7 or 8 people that never saw it, it must be a great movie (and the fact that it was 9 bucks didn't hurt). And I suppose it pretty much is--if only for its popularity--though I spent about 1/3 of it completely lost. It was interesting enough that I suppose I'll have to watch it again and have another go at detangling the intricacies.

One problem is that this particular DVD is the director's cut, which is always a lot more pretentious, a lot more obscure, and usually cuts out the best bits and includes 18 bucketloads of irrelevant, maundering crud. Witness the hatchet job they did on the director's cut of Apocalypse Now. Pathetic. Maybe the original "Blade Runner" was a bit more coherent...but I have a feeling this was just one of those projects that was dreamed up over a case or two of Heinekin and put together by people with too much money and too much time.

So why do I come away from my first viewing sort of liking this steaming pile of crap? I confuse myself sometimes. But then, what do you expect from a former college theater major?


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home