

How the opening scenes of Blade Runner were made (video) - coffee
http://douglastrumbull.com/key-fx-sequences-blade-runner-hades-landscape

======
evo_9
I agree entirely with the various posts as to why Blade Runner has held up so
well - the keen visual style, the incredible craftsmanship of Trumbull, and
least of which - Ridley Scott's brilliant directing.

There is one other thing that I pointed out 10+ years ago in a film class
that's often overlooked - the hair styles of the film (and also Alien 1).

Seriously, think about what a smart/bold design move it was to have everyone
in such short hair - it's timeless. If you think I'm joking compare Alien 1 or
Blade Runner to Aliens By James Cameron - a movie can be dated by mishandling
such a small detail.

The other thing I love is how thorough Ridley Scott, Sid Mead, Dan O'Bannon
and Trumbull's vision is in both Blade Runner and Alien (1); so dense and
fully realized you get the sense that the doom shipped _Nostromo_ departed
Blade-Runner earth. Classic, incredible films.

~~~
hugh3
I don't get it, not having an immediate mental picture of the haircuts in the
various Alien movies ready to hand.

But is the fact that movies with short hair look less "dated" just due to the
fact that we live in a time where long hair is out? In thirty years if long
hair becomes popular again will our short-haired movies look horrendously
dated and Luke Skywalker look up-to-the-minute?

~~~
eru
There's less variation possible in short hair cuts. Thus it's harder to look
dated.

If you want to go all the way, shave your characters heads.

------
keyle
It amazes me how that scene today still looks realistic.

It reminds me of Alien 1's ship interior built with spare parts of vacuum
cleaners I think, it just brought so much more details that you couldn't get
from CGI for at least 20 years.

I miss these old scifi movies where the special effects were crafted by hand.
They had a real feel, that I still don't get from 'so clean yet dirtied' CGI.

~~~
studer
As someone pointed out over at MetaFilter, a big part of the realism of that
scene is thanks to a solid understanding of how cameras, lighting, and film
work and interact, rather than super-detailed modelling. Trumbull is a
photographic effects wizard, but he also had 80 years of earlier work to build
on. I'm not sure we're quite there yet when it comes to CGI.

------
elblanco
I try and watch BR at least once a year. Future L.A. is a place so detailed
that it seems absolutely real.

Not only is it a brilliant movie, it holds up amazingly well given its age. It
could probably be released today and nobody would know the difference.

~~~
ouhjygj
No it couldn't. There is no car chase, no explosions and only a couple of
violent deaths.

Plus it has all this plot stuff that you have to 'like' concentrate on ...

Although it did invent the concept of anti-product placements. People would
pay not to be placed in the remake!

~~~
hugh3
_No it couldn't. There is no car chase, no explosions and only a couple of
violent deaths.

Plus it has all this plot stuff that you have to 'like' concentrate on ..._

I'm sure if you went back to read the movie reviews from the year Blade Runner
came out, you'd find them full of similar sentiments. "Blah blah, they don't
make sophisticated movies any more, people only care about spectacle and car
chases and explosions." No doubt people will be making similar complaints in
another 30 years while completely ignoring the sophisticated movies being
produced in their own time ( _"Man, nobody makes movies like Primer or
District 9 any more, do they?_ )

(Yes, I know District 9 has explosions.)

------
studer
Two shorter Blade Runner clips can be found here.

<http://douglastrumbull.com/videos>

The one about how they filmed the blimp was pretty amazing.

~~~
elblanco
Something that keeps coming up over and over in his descriptions is how they
kept trying to do this amazing work on a very tight budget. Which is
astounding both because of the quality of the result, and how it seems like
effects budget today is virtually unlimited.

(didn't we move to CGI to try and cut costs?)

~~~
eru
Reduced cost per unit often leads to greater demand.

------
superk
Pretty amazing website. He also built a scale model solution for the BP oil
spill (while most people were just waxing philosophical about what to do):

<http://douglastrumbull.com/bp-spill-fix-prototype-solution>

Can't believe I didn't hear about this in the news.

------
joezydeco
Kind of reminds me of how they made the HBO "Starship" intro video from the
80s:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Et_LsxlX8Y>

It's boggling to think about the amount of time and energy spent to make each
of these 30 seconds of work. It's never going to be done this way again.

~~~
elblanco
I remember watching that at the time and think it was a cool bit of movie
wizardry. However, I don't think it's stood the test of time in the same way
the Blade Runner effects have. The effects scenes in Blade Runner are nearly
_flawless_. There is so much detail, some of it almost compulsively
unnecessary. There's a scene where Decker is walking to his apartment, and you
get a long view shot down the rows of buildings -- every time I see that I
think "that's totally unnecessary, they could have just angled the camera such
that you don't see the externals of the building, but oh man does it build a
sense of setting". If you freeze one of those frames, it tells so much story
about future L.A.

~~~
joezydeco
Well, Trumbull is just a cut above. Hands down.

I still want a computer setup like the one in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Or a tape
scanner like the one from Brainstorm (a very underrated movie btw)

------
sp332
BoingBoing interviewed Syd Mead, who designed the "look and feel" of the world
of Blade Runner. <http://tv.boingboing.net/syd-mead/> Note that page has a
three-part interview in reverse chronological order. It's all interesting, but
the third part is the one that deals with Blade Runner specifically.

------
zandorg
Some Bladerunner DVD collections have the 3:53 hour long documentary "Dark
Days", which is excellent and goes into Trumbull's work in great detail.

------
ralphc
Blade Runner holds up well EXCEPT...phone booths? That really makes me pause
when I've watched it in recent years, no one has a phone. The one thing Blade
Runner got wrong, but understandable considering when it came out.

~~~
hugh3
Also we don't have off-world colonies, flying cars and replicants. Judge it as
a movie, not as a prediction.

If you really want to fanwank it as correctly representing some future level
of technology, though, imagine that in the future radio-frequency
communications have been found to cause cancer and have been banned.

------
rbanffy
Thanks, coffee.

------
brendonjason
So it would seem that creativity trumps the massive budgets and state of the
art technology that are the hallmarks of just about all modern day SciFi
flicks; hmmm ... wonder if that principle is somehow applicable to the startup
scene?

~~~
hkuo
I dunno. That setup looked pretty darn expensive. Did you see the number and
size of all of the pieces involved? Custom etched and built models. Huge
amounts of high-powered explosives. Not to mention the cost of the film. I
don't mean to undercut your point of finding creative solutions, but I'm not
sure this is a good example.

~~~
Avshalom
well if wikipedia is to be believed it had a 28 mill budget so 67 mill today.
67 doesn't sound like much compared to Avatar or Lord of the Rings but it's
still a hell of a lot. And IIRC Harrison Ford was the only big name at the
time, which saved them some money I'm sure.

