• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

Blade Runner: Tears in the Rain:

MCP

Well-known member
Messages
12,819
Reaction score
439
Trophy Points
168
Blade Runner: Tears in the Rain:


the A/V looked and sounded fine to me. that high contrast BW looked great to me, it drew me into the environment even more so than the original's color palette. all the audio sounded fine, no hard cuts or weird fades. replacing the score may have been nice, but i realize how hard that can be at times. plus that's the editor's choice, he wanted to leave it as is, so be it.
the narrative, it all still made sense even with so much cut. Ranger's intention was clearly successful and the only weird story element has been said already, what happened to Rachel. the biggest improvement is dropping that horrible narration.
it's a fantastic edit and Ranger did a top notch job and i'll take this over any of the studio versions, but i still don't like this movie; it's still boring and moves incredibly slow. but that's on me, Ranger didn't say he was trying to make it fast and more exciting, just present the story in a different way, which he completely accomplishes. i seriously put the original film at like 4 or 5. Ranger's version here has boosted that rating for me.
if you're a blade runner fan, this one is worth your time.



http://ifdb.fanedit.org/blade-runner-tears-in-the-rain/discussions/8903/
 
Top Bottom