SCREEN-L Archives

March 2002, Week 3


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
David Skreiner <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:27:31 +0100
text/plain (34 lines)
There are several discussions about the original cut and the
much more complex director's cut of "Blade Runner".

Apparently, one of the main reasons that a happy ending was
pasted onto the movie was the test audiences' bewildered
responsed to the director's "audience test cut" [whatever they
call them...]. The studios have a reputation for wanting quick
cash, which is created by putting bums on seats in the midwest.
So if a midwestern lower-middle-class audience doesn't like the
movie... it's back to the cutting room.

Detailed discussions of the endings, cut versions, plot mysteries
and more aspects of Blade Runner can be found in the FAQ at

My personal suspicion is that something similar happened to
Kathryn Bigelow's "Near Dark", where the "happy ending" is
so incredibly stupid and stands out from the rest of the film so
badly that it has me frustrated every time I remember the film...
or maybe I'm just fed up with puritan Redemption stories :-)

Dave Skreiner
Editor, DVD-Home

> "Blade Runner' in particular garnered commentary about its
> incomprehensibility, in all its versions (as I understand it, the main
> reason there was narration and the supposedly "happy ending" in the
> original release was that Warner Brothers wasn't sure anyone would
> understand the film).

For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: