h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A579260

Here's an entry I found in Tinkerbells lair, I think it deserves a place in the guide!

Z.

Definitely

Couple of points:

"falls in love with Rachael, one of those who he was sent to kill"

IIRC he wasn't sent to kill Rachael, though she is a replicant, which may be what the writer intended to mean?

Could also be worth mentioning more about the visuals of the film, the style of the buildings, the multicultural mishmash on the streets, the fact that it's always raining etc. Bladerunner defined a much-emulated visual style.

Nice entry. Blade Runner certainly deserves a place in the guide somewhere! (It's one of my favourite films!)

Few points:
Rutger Hauer actually wrote the 'tears in the rain' speech while on set and was allowed to try it out. Obviously once it was heard, it was left in!

Deckard was sent to kill Rachel. After he takes care of the first replicant (whose name temporarily escapes me) Gaff says to him something like "1 down, four to go" Deckard disagrees, "There's 3" and Gaff explains, "4, the receptionist at Tyrell disappeared this morning".

In a recent documentary about Blade Runner Ridley Scott did confirm that Deckard is a replicant. As the article says, the unicorn dream sequence, combined with the origami unicorn left at the final scene by Gaff seem to confirm it.

Might be worth mentioning the differences between the original release and the directors cut. Primarily the original (following test screenings) had the initial voice-over added at the beginning and the tacked on 'happy ending' at the end, which were both removed for the directors cut release. The unicorn dream sequence was added, supporting the Deckard as replicant theory.

I seem to remember the sets used had previously been used on another film, but I'd have to check that to be sure.

It's also notable for the lack of fortune experienced by many of the major product placements within the film following its release. Again, I'd have to check the specifics but Atari certainly haven't made it as far as 2019

The photograph zoom sequence was subsequently used for a Martini advert too, but that might be getting off the point of the article!

*grins*
Thankyou! Ooh my first peer reviewed article

It wasn't actually finished when you guys read it, hence me only having one piece of evidence written down but I've sorted it now Do you think I should add a trivia section to the bottom then? You know with the bits about the BladeRunner curse (many companies failing) like you said and stuff about who created what bits of speech and which bits were cut due to arguments and the like?

I don't care what you add as long as you mention the soundtrack

*grins*
Aaah Vangelis... is that ok to put in a trivia section too or should it get it's own little heading like I can do for visuals?

If you've got enough to say about the score then I guess it deserves its own section too. I know the film had a rough time at the hands of critics, but visuals and sound were the bits everyone liked even then.

By the way, if you've seen High Noon, a bit of comparison would be nice .

I like this entry a lot. One thing, though, is that I think it is a bit too gloomy about the film's reception on its original release. My memory is that it was one of the most widely-discussed films of the time, and I knew quite a few people (not necessarily normally SF fans) who counted it at the time as one of their favourite films.

I would have considered it an instant cult classic, not something that people needed time to learn to appreciate.
Azara

Where can you find the music that runs during the credits? I love that music...

There's a soundtrack album available from Warner Brothers. An online retail site named after a certain race of female warriors has it, but I'm sure you can get it from other places too .
I think it has some music from Vangelis which he composed at the same time but didn't make it into the film.

It's the last track but one on the Blade Runner Original Soundtrack CD.

I'm only going off my memory of the book, which i read a long time ago, so correct me if i am wrong but i can't remember having the impression Decker was or thought he might be a replicant.

He decided that Rachel was so close to human it was not worth the days of testing it took to prove that she wasn't...

Linus...with the dodgy memory, trying to remember where the book is so he can check

The film is very different from the book. I saw the film first, and had great trouble with the book. I never finished Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, although I plan to give it another crack sometime when I can afford books again.

The Deckard-as-android deal is primarily film, and indeed primarily Director's Cut, with the unicorn dream sequence (cut from Ridley Scott's Legend IIRC). In a similar vein - and I'm about to go and read the article itself, so forgive me if this is already in - the computer graphics when Gaff's aircar is docking with the precinct are recycled from Alien.

The Prophet.

And to the article:

Basically good stuff; all informative and - so far as I can recall - accurate.

Asthetically, I don't like the all caps headers, and underlined subheaders seem excessive for the character names. I'd suggest something like bold for the names (but not all caps), followed by italicised (sp?) quotes, and leave off the underline. Alternatively, subheader the names, then blockquote the character quotes underneath. Same with your 'The Evidence' subheader.

You seem to have left out Leon ("Let me tell you about my mother"), who is as important a character as Zorha; perhaps more so as he is the first replicant we see.

Also, it's sometimes helpful to put a link from a film article to the IMDb page for the film.

But otherwise, sterling work.

The Prophet.

I have to agree with everybody so far and say that it is a very good entry. I have some comments about what I'd like to see included and how, but nothing different to anything anyone else has said.

Mainly I feel that the entry focuses on explaining what a Blade Runner is, and then asking whether Deckard is one or not. I feel there are some other directions you could take the entry. E.g. the gloomy feel of the film, the use of flying cars and amazing backgrounds, the advertising, the soundtrack, the difference between the original and Director's cuts (all stuff that has been mentioned by others). IMHO although it makes the entry very good the "Is Deckard a replicant?" question is not the be all and end all to such an entry. The film has so much more to offer. I also think that "most" people would never pick up on the "Is he/isn't he?" debate unless it's pointed out to them, which sort of justifies (at least in my mind) that there is more to the film.

As an aside there is an error in the film (although you may see this as support for the replicant question). I can't remember the numbers (so forgive me). At the start the guy says something about seven replicants escaping and returning to Earth. One got fried trying to run through an electric fence, while Deckard then hunts down 4 or 5 others. Ultimately one is missing. Is it a mistake or deliberate?

Anyway good entry, I've seen a lot more incomplete entries make the Guide so this should have no problems.

BBS

The director's cut was deffinatly better, but the book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is conpleatly different in every way from the movie except for a few names and the Voit-Kamph test. The "Is this to prove I'm and android or a lesbian?" line is a running gag through out the book. Another thought is the placement of Gaff in the movie. Now, a gaff is a tool whis is primarily a long pole with a metal hoot at one end. This allows someone to pull things down or pull things up depending on where you are situated. And another thing, Gaff only speaks twice in the movie. The first time he talks in street-talk at the noodle restaurant. The second it when he is on the roof at the end and tosses Deckard the gun saying "You've done a man's work, sir." then he walks away and says "It's too bad she won't live, but then again, who does?" This is one of my favorite movies and I have both versions on tape.

There were 6 fleeing replicants, one of whom died on the way, leaving 5 of which he only retires 4. Apart from the obvious possibility that it's a mistake, it could be that Deckard is himself the missing replicant (whoever wrote http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/newsid_825000/825641.stm certainly thinks so), it could be Rachel, or it could be that it was meant to be dealt with in the sequel: this never got made but in the book 'Blade Runner 2 - The Edge Of Human', Deckard gets summoned back to LA to deal with the last replicant.

Where is the film set ?

LA or Middlesbrough ?

Just look at the opening scenes - there is the futuristic pyramid LAish-style office building ok but it's surrounded by the infernal and dehumanised flarestacks of the Billingham works (now ICI Wilton).

And Sebastian's flat is a Gothic/Victorian palace that could accommodate hundreds : a symbol of the wealth created by the industrial revolution which in Middlesbrough was founded on labour intensive steel and ship-building industries. Now empty bar one socially challenged technogeek.

Outside - fast-food outlets and adverts for jobs somewhere else.

This film operates on many levels and hits out in a lot of directions.
Love the article - but you just have to mention Middlesbrough

*grins*
So you're sure I should go with the angle of it being a parody of Middlesborough rather than the whole humanity debate then?

Checkout Ridley Scott's biographical details. Like where he was born and brought up. And what's happened there in the last 30 years or so.

If you then think that that's irrelevant then so be it

Requiem is a far better word than parody

Middlesbrough only has one 'o' in it.

Great article