Oft having watched the film (directors cut) it comments that the ending was dramatically altered. I also heard that the 'Directors cut' was a total joke as the director (name i cant recall) was happy with the original and didn't want no part of any directers cut.
So, can anyone fill the blanks?
2006-10-24 20:44:49 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
in the original cut Dekard and Rachel drive off together and live happilly ever after, using left over footage from the shining (honest)
Dekard announces via voice over that she had no termination date and could live a full life.
Directors cut by Ridley Scott is the better version
2006-10-24 20:48:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Groo has the ending correct.
The first film has constant character voice-over from Dekard. It makes the movie feel like "Sam Spade meets Frankenstein." Although the Director's Cut may have been a bit more confusing for some, it was certainly the better movie.
2006-10-25 04:31:54 · answer #2 · answered by 13caesars 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The aerial shot is of them driving away through trees. I don't know who told you Ridley Scott didn't like the director's cut. Scott asked if such nice woodlands still existed, why would anyone stay in horrible L.A.? The other difference is that the 1982 version had a voice-over by Deckard.
2006-10-25 04:41:09 · answer #3 · answered by Dunrobin 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ridley Scott.
He comes running on with a chainsaw and hacks Daryl Hannah's robo-limbs apart.
She 'dies' dreaming of electric sheep.
2006-10-25 03:47:22 · answer #4 · answered by jinz 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋