Slashdot had an article today marking the 25th anniversary of the release of Ridley Scott's vision of Bladerunner, and points at Mythbuster Adam Savage's claim that it stands at the apex of science fiction effects, created in a time before computer graphics.
I think I agree.
I'm tempted to add another Ridley Scott film into the mix: of course the classic Alien, complete in 1979, and I'm also quite fond of the John Carpenter film The Thing from this era, but the combination of visuals and story in Bladerunner are awfully amazing. Astounding even. If there is one movie that would compel me to upgrade my DVD player to something more high definition, a good release of Bladerunner would be near the top of the list (seeing it on conventional DVD just does not do it justice.)
But to be honest, it isn't really the big effects shots that stun me with this film. I mean really, check this out...
Okay, this is a nice wide establishing shot with some clever background work. But now look at these shots:
Bladerunner succeeds in no small measure because of the care which is taken in all the shots which are not the big effects shots, which just show photos of the actors giving solid performances. Try comparing this to shots in the latest Star Wars trilogy. It's no contest. None at all. True classic movies succeed not because one or two shots are unforgettable, but because they nearly all are.
Oh, and this movie might actually be one that might make me believe that film still has some merit and relevance.
Technorati Tags: Bladerunner