• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

DARK CITY war!!!

Harrison Ford's Deckard just isn't compelling, to me, and Rutger Hauer is just, IMO, grossly miscast in this role.
Well, Ford plays Deckard as confused and bored in a lot of scenes (I'm not even sure 'plays' is the right word) and Rutger Hauer mostly camps it up as Roy.

I'm tempted to compare him to a far more hilariously camp performance - "I will kill you!" - but I'd rather not, he's not that over-the-top. I suppose the intent is that Roy is still emotionally a child - a four year old, really - and he has a child's imtemperance and vulernabilities.

Comparing the souls, I'd say Dark City has a little more of one, though both films benefit enormously from their atmosphere and style, and sense of place, often overriding the particulars of the plot.

If I remember it right, in the original novel the androids were meant as an analogue for humans without any empathy, the film however sort of turns this on it's head by having Deckard be the one without empathy with the Replicants the emotional beings, the innocents in a way. The fact that they're machines is neither here nor there. In any halfway good science fiction piece, just about every character is a reflection of some aspect of humanity whether they're robots, aliens or humans. Of course the empathy or lack there of isn't the only important aspect of the film, there's plenty of others to choose from.

As for Roy specifically, I think you have it about right. Emotionally he's a child, but with the intellect of an adult and the skills of a killer. What he isn't however, is "camp."

I'm not saying 'Blade Runner' is inherently superior to 'Dark City' because saying so would be a nonsense. It's a matter of taste and for me personally, BR is just marginally more compelling.
 
If I remember it right, in the original novel the androids were meant as an analogue for humans without any empathy,
Precisely, yes. This is a somewhat consistent tack in PKD, treating androids as humans without empathy; which I suppose relates to the idea that humans without empathy have lost their humanity.
 
'Camp'? Seriously?
Yes.

Come now, googly eyes, big grin. It's not Sting as Feyd-Rautha, but it does make me think of that.

This is a situation where I actually feel tempted to ask if we've seen the same "Blade Runner" movie :lol:. Seriously, I completely disagree. I think Hauer's performance is nothing short of stunning. I can't see anything over-the-top or campy about it in the slightest based on the character he's playing.

IMHO he's absolutely spot-on as Batty and one of the major reasons this film works as well as it does and continues to fascinate people to this day. You follow Deckard throughout the movie, but I think Batty is the one that has to draw you in emotionally (which is exactly what Hauer does, in my case, anyway).
 
Nobody draws me in emotionally to Blade Runner. It's a cold, distant film. Which is fine, so is 2001 - and Roy Batty in the rain, portentiously releasing a dove into the sky, is, well, a little much (and too cute by far.)
 
^
Interesting. Then your response to Blade Runner is obviously quite different from my own.
It's certainly a cold film. And distance or alienation are definitely themes. But I find myself very much drawn in to it emotionally. Seeing Batty die, for example, is both a relief (since he's obviously dangerous) as well as something that makes me sad.

It's not just the fact that "All those moments ..." will be lost (which is always the case when somebody dies to some extent) but seeing him fully realise it as a living, thinking and feeling being. And the way Hauer delivers those final lines is simply amazing, I think.

As for the dove, well, I have to say I actually like it (although I generally don't go for these things in movies). I think it fits quite well both as a counterpart to the dark, cold world that Blade Runner is set in as well as an imagine that aligns itself quite well with the image of the unicorn.
Either way, that part was probably not Hauer's doing (though amazingly the "All those moments ..." line seems to be).
 
Nobody draws me in emotionally to Blade Runner. It's a cold, distant film. Which is fine, so is 2001 - and Roy Batty in the rain, portentiously releasing a dove into the sky, is, well, a little much (and too cute by far.)

The film is defiantly emotional, however the primary emotion in play is more often than not melancholy, so it's understandable that not everyone can feel engaged by that. Of course all they need to do is dial their empathy boxes to 375, "desire to be emotionally engaged with Blade Runner." ;)
 
Of course all they need to do is dial their empathy boxes to 375, "desire to be emotionally engaged with Blade Runner." ;)
Hah!

I actually think the most emotional moment of the film has little of anything to do with the plot or character and everything to do with the atmosphere: An image, early in the film, of Deckard alone on the balcony, cradling a drink, looking out into the big lonely city below. Urban alienation, cyberpunk, I love that stuff.
 
Blade Runner still causes debate 25 years on. Sign of a good movie!

Actually sign of my fave movie of all. I think BR is brilliant. I also have endless love for Dark City, which for me had one of the great twists in movie history. I did not see that coming, and it blew me away in the cinema.

The Matrix I liked just as much as Dark City, if not a little more when I first saw it. The red pill had been spoiled for me, or that would have been an amazing twist too. The big problem with The Matrix is that it was actually complete as a movie in itself. It didn't need the sequels. IMO the sequels lessen the impact of the first film, and even diminish it in my estimation. That's why The Matrix isn't as good now.
 
^Yeah that was unfortunate about The Matrix. I'm still waiting for the Directors to let the rest of us in on the practical joke, I mean there's no way they were being serious...right?

Of course all they need to do is dial their empathy boxes to 375, "desire to be emotionally engaged with Blade Runner." ;)
Hah!

I actually think the most emotional moment of the film has little of anything to do with the plot or character and everything to do with the atmosphere: An image, early in the film, of Deckard alone on the balcony, cradling a drink, looking out into the big lonely city below. Urban alienation, cyberpunk, I love that stuff.

I remember a few years back there was a Blade Runner game in which they recreated certain shots from the film and I'm pretty sure that was one of them. Great shot and Vangelis really helps to sell it.
In fact I'm willing to say the soundtrack alone could put BR over and above Dark City & Matrix. I honestly can't remember what Dark City's score was like and I've fairly certain all that Rob Zombie heavy goth rocky metal stuff will start to date very quicky. Vangelis's work on the other had was a really timeless piece of work.
 
That shot is definitely in the game. It's a pretty decent adventure game, actually.

Dark City has a decent score, which works well in the film, but I don't think I would call it great, unlike Vangelis' work on Blade Runner.
 
Dark City's score was mostly classical, (leaving aside the songs Connelly's character sings) and worked pretty well. It definitely hasn't dated much.
 
As soon as I watched the Matrix I thought Dark City but I suppose I'm not alone there.

So this Blade Runner thing; never heard of it.
 
Dark City's score was mostly classical, (leaving aside the songs Connelly's character sings) and worked pretty well. It definitely hasn't dated much.

I recall Trevor Jones' score invoking a lot of mechanical weirdness. Especially in scenes with the strangers and/or tuning.

Not going to argue that Vangelis' score to Blade Runner isn't incredibly 1980s, either. It's definitely of the period. But it also works so well (and one of these days it is surely to be released properly and legally on CD...one of these days).
 
^
Maybe. I mostly remember the bombastic parts, which were for the action sequences. Very conventional, but not bad.

As soon as I watched the Matrix I thought Dark City but I suppose I'm not alone there.
I think it'd be fair to say: As soon as people watched Dark City they thought of the Matrix. ;)

While the Matrix was an instant hit, Dark City IIRC didn't perform too well upon release and subsequently became a cult classic, so many people - myself included - would have seen it after the Matrix.
 
I think Blade Runner is better than Dark City, but Dark City is better than The Matrix. Dark City is one of my favourite science fiction films, though.

Wholly agree. By some trick of fate, I've seen The Matrix more than either of the other two films though. Probably because it's on TV more.
 
Not going to argue that Vangelis' score to Blade Runner isn't incredibly 1980s, either. It's definitely of the period. But it also works so well (and one of these days it is surely to be released properly and legally on CD...one of these days).
You mean like this one?
 
They don't make enough of these sorts of films if you ask me. I can think of few more immersive fantasies than Dark City, it really is a gem.

I agree the director's cut is far superior, I only wish I'd been able to see that first.
 
As soon as I watched the Matrix I thought Dark City but I suppose I'm not alone there.
I think it'd be fair to say: As soon as people watched Dark City they thought of the Matrix. ;)

While the Matrix was an instant hit, Dark City IIRC didn't perform too well upon release and subsequently became a cult classic, so many people - myself included - would have seen it after the Matrix.

Well, obviously, I didn't. I saw Dark City when it came out and thought it was excellent. But then I'm a Rufus Sewell fan and I suspect most people over the pond still wouldn't recognise that name if it slapped them in the face.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top