Future Noir Revised & Updated Edition
eBook - ePub

Future Noir Revised & Updated Edition

Paul M. Sammon

Share book
  1. 624 pages
  2. English
  3. ePUB (mobile friendly)
  4. Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub

Future Noir Revised & Updated Edition

Paul M. Sammon

Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations

About This Book

The ultimate guide to Ridley Scott's transformative sci-fi classic Blade Runner

Ridley Scott's 2007 "Final Cut" confirmed the international film cognoscenti's judgment: Blade Runner, based on Philip K. Dick's brilliant and troubling science fiction masterpiece Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, is among the most visually dense, thematically challenging, and influential science fiction films ever made. Future Noir Revised & Updated Edition offers a deeper understanding of this cinematic phenomenon that is storytelling and visual filmmaking at its best.

In this intensive, intimate, and anything-but-glamorous behind-the-scenes account, film insider and cinephile Paul M. Sammon explores how Ridley Scott purposefully used his creative genius to transform the work of science fiction's most uncompromising author into a critical sensation and cult classic that would reinvent the genre. Sammon reveals how the making of the original Blade Runner was a seven-year odyssey that would test the stamina and the imagination of writers, producers, special effects wizards, and the most innovative art directors and set designers in the industry at the time it was made. This revised and expanded edition of Future Noir includes:

  • An overview of Blade Runner 's impact on moviemaking and its acknowledged significance in popular culture since the book's original 1996 publication
  • An exploration of the history of Blade Runner: The Final Cut and its theatrical release in 2007
  • A look at its long-awaited sequel, Blade Runner 2049
  • The longest interview Harrison Ford has ever granted about Blade Runner
  • Exclusive new interviews with Rutger Hauer and Sean Young

A fascinating look at the ever-shifting interface between commerce and art, illustrated with production photos and stills, Future Noir provides an eye-opening and enduring look at modern moviemaking, the business of Hollywood, and one of the greatest films of all time.

Frequently asked questions

How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on “Cancel Subscription” - it’s as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time you’ve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlego’s features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan you’ll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, we’ve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is Future Noir Revised & Updated Edition an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access Future Noir Revised & Updated Edition by Paul M. Sammon in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Medien & darstellende Kunst & Film & Video. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.

Information

Year
2017
ISBN
9780062852892
INTERVIEWS
A 700-LAYER LAYER CAKE
INTERVIEW WITH RIDLEY SCOTT
An evident love of special effects, combined with a craftsmanlike determination to tell a good story with well-drawn characters, have been the main features of Scott’s movies.
—THE ILLUSTRATED WHO’S WHO OF THE CINEMA EDITED BY ANN LLOYD AND GRAHAM FULLER (MACMILLAN, 1983)
Ridley Scott was born in England on November 30, 1937, in South Shields, County Durham, to Elizabeth Williams and Colonel Francis Percy Scott. Originally trained as an artist and production designer, Scott began his professional directing career on early 1960’s British TV shows like 1965’s Adam Adamant Lives! He then, in 1968, with his younger brother, Tony Scott, launched an extremely fruitful film and commercial production company named Ridley Scott Associates, which saw Ridley personally directing, producing and shooting literally thousands of TV commercials. Scott next launched a feature film directing career with 1977’s The Duellists; his later feature film directorial credits include Alien (1979), Blade Runner (1982), Legend (1985), Someone to Watch Over Me (1987), Black Rain (1989), Thelma & Louise (1991), 1492: Conquest of Paradise (1992), White Squall (1996), GI Jane (1997), Gladiator (2000), Hannibal (2001), Black Hawk Down (also 2001), Matchstick Men (2003), Kingdom of Heaven (2005), A Good Year (2006), American Gangster (2007), Body of Lies (2008), Robin Hood (2008), Prometheus (2012), The Counselor, Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014), The Martian (2015), and Alien: Covenant (2017). Scott has also functioned as a seemingly inexhaustible producer on most of his feature films through his production company Scott Free, and served as an Executive Producer for many other films (such as 2017’s upcoming Murder on the Orient Express) and television series (like 2009-2016’s lauded The Good Wife, and the 2015-to-the-present Netfliix series The Man In the High Castle . . . a multi-episode series based on the novel by Philip K. Dick).
Today, due to his insanely prolific, impressively successful career, Scott is one of the United Kingdom’s most recognized and respected businessmen and film artists. So much so that on July 8, 2003, the Queen of England bestowed a knighthood upon the director during a ceremony at London’s Buckingham Palace. Meaning that he can now be legitimately addressed as “Sir Ridley Scott”.
As of 2017, Scott’s highest-profile films remain Alien, Thelma and Louise, Gladiator (which won five Oscars, including Best Picture), and The Martian (a popular, Matt Damon-starring, Oscar-nominated “Robinson Crusoe on Mars” drama/comedy). Scott recently returned to his Alien roots by helming two ambitious prequels—Prometheus and Alien: Covenant—which explore the origins and philosophical underpinnings of Alien’s mysterious Face-huggers, eggs and Xenomorphs.
Of course, for the purposes of this book, Ridley Scott is best known for directing 1982’s Blade Runner. Scott was also looking to direct Blade Runner 2049, the 35-years-in-the-making BR sequel, but scheduling conflicts forced him to function as an Executive Producer instead. In any event, the highly-anticipated BR 2049 (which was still in production during the writing of FN’s Revised Third Edition) is scheduled for an October 6, 2017 release.
The ensuing interview pertains only to the original Blade Runner and its legacy through 1995: Scott comments on other aspects of the film’s continuing history within the main body of this book. What follows is an edited composite of a series of formal conversations that took place between Ridley Scott and this author on the following dates: September 10, 1980; May 15, 1981; June 12, 1982; February 17, 1994; September 22, 1994; September 13, 1995; and December 4, 1995.
PAUL M. SAMMON: I’d like to begin with a query regarding one of Blade Runner’s biggest question marks: the “Unicorn Scene” in the Director’s Cut, that moment in the film when Harrison Ford is slumped at his piano and daydreaming about this mythical beast. Before we get into that shot’s thematic meanings, I’d like to ask about its origins. Was it in any way influenced by Legend, the film you did after Blade Runner, which also featured unicorns?
RIDLEY SCOTT: No. That unicorn was actually filmed prior to any thought of making Legend. In fact, it was specifically shot for Blade Runner during the postproduction process. At that point in time I was editing the picture in England, at Pinewood Studios, and we were heading towards a mix. Yet I still, creatively speaking, had this blank space in my head in regards to what Deckard’s dream at the piano was going to be all about.
That was distressing, because this was an important moment for me. I’d predetermined that that unicorn scene would be the strongest clue that Deckard, this hunter of replicants, might actually be an artificial human himself. I did feel that this dream had to be vague, indirect. I didn’t mind if it remained a bit mysterious, either, so that you had to think about it. Because there is a clear thread throughout the film that would later explain it.
Anyway, I eventually realized I had to think of an image that was so personal it could only belong to an individual’s inner thoughts. And eventually I hit on a unicorn.
You mentioned the word “dream,” which is interesting. Because the way you staged that scene in Blade Runner, it’s almost as if Ford’s drifting off into a reverie.
Yeah. Well, actually, he’s pissed. He’s drunk. On a rather strange bottle of twenty-first-century Johnny Walker Red. Which he took with him, you may remember, when he went to get his hard copy from the Esper.
Unfortunately, I don’t think I really played Deckard drunk enough in that scene. What I mean by that is the Deckard character was supposed to be somewhat Marlowesque, after the Raymond Chandler antihero, you know? And Marlowe was always a little tiddly. So I thought that that scene would be a good opportunity to see our own hero a bit drunk while he was trying to work, as he was puzzling over these old photographs.
Ah, Blade Runner’s infamous photographs. Why did you choose that particular device to associate with the film’s replicants?
Because photographs are essentially history. Which is what these replicants don’t have.
One final question regarding the replicants’ fascination with photographs—couldn’t these snapshots also be interpreted as hard-copy analogs of the artificial memories implanted in the androids?
Definitely. Don’t forget that just prior to the unicorn scene, Deckard has told Rachael that her memories are not hers. Then he gives her a couple of examples of these implants, like the spider giving birth outside her window. At which point Rachael basically breaks down and leaves Deckard’s apartment. And he feels, I guess, guilty about that process.
We next find Deckard poring over the photographs and doodling at his piano. And of course what we then do is reveal an extremely private and innermost thought of his, which is triggered by the music Deckard is playing. Now, music, in my mind at least, is a very visual medium. It can provoke intense imagery. So when Deckard kind of drifts off at that moment, I thought that the image which came into his mind ought to be something which we would otherwise never see in the movie.
I must confess that when I first saw the completed film at the San Diego preview, I felt the exclusion of the unicorn scene seriously disrupted the connections you were trying to make. I picked up on the other clues that Deckard might be a replicant-this collection of photographs, the scene where Ford’s eyes glow—but without that specific shot of the unicorn in the woods, I felt more inclined to accept Olmos’ act of leaving behind the tinfoil unicorn as merely an indication that Gaff had come to Deckard’s apartment and decided to let Sean Young live. But then, when I saw the Director’s Cut, the inclusion of the live unicorn made a more emotional impact. Now I could see that that tinfoil origami was a sign Gaff knew Deckard’s thoughts. So it’s almost as if there are two different movies there. In the original theatrical release, Deckard might be a replicant; in the Director’s Cut, he is one.
They are two different movies. But the Director’s Cut is closer to what I was originally after.
What I find interesting about that unicorn scene is that while so much has been made by the critics of the unicorn, they’ve actually missed the wider issue. It is not the unicorn itself which is important. It’s the landscape around it—the green landscape—they should be noticing.
I understand what you’re saying. But, to be fair, I can also understand the confusion. The original prints of Blade Runner did, in fact, conclude with green landscapes. Even if they were tacked-on ones.
Tacked on, as you say. By some of the producers, and by the studio. Which I’m sure we’ll talk about later.
But before that happened, my original thought had been to never show a green landscape during Blade Runner. We would only see an urban world. But I subsequently figured, since this moment of Deckard noodling at the piano offered the pictorial opportunity of a dream, why not show a unicorn? In a forest? It’san image that’s so out of place with the rest of the picture that even if I only run it for three seconds, the audience will clearly understand that they’re witnessing some sort of reverie.
Given the confusion that that unicorn has raised in some circles, I’m not sure your faith in the audience was justified.
I know what you mean. Maybe I should amend that to say, I was sure that the part of the audience which was paying attention would understand it! [laughs]
Besides creative differences, I understand another reason the unico...

Table of contents