Blade Runner (1982) User Reviews

A warning to the curious.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 9/10 · 16 June 2023]

In the future year of 2019, a group of four replicas arrive on Earth in search of their creator, Blade Runner Rick Deckard is persuaded into hunting them down.

Love it or hate it, one thing that can't be questioned, is the amount of movies that this film inspired. Blade Runner was a ground breaking movie, one that was way ahead of its time.

Blade Runner is up there with Dune for me as one of the greatest movies to come out of the 80's, I would definitely deem it as a classic, it's so watchable.

The best element for me, the visuals, this is one the truly exquisite looking film, consider the era it was made in, and the lack of sophisticated special effects and tech, this is a triumph of creativity.

I know pacing is an issue for some, and storytelling has changed with time, but the pace here is very deliberate, it develops and builds, it's there to give you a sense of unease. Don't expect action at every turn, that's not the purpose of the film.

The music of Vangelis is terrific throughout, it adds to the film, and never imposes or tries to overtake.

I always love seeing someone's vision of the future, and the future world is wonderfully imaginative and perfectly realised, though still wonderfully 1980's, so there's plenty of punk and glam, big hair, clear plastic jackets and eye shadow galore. One thing that was spot on, a greater coming together of cultures.

A recent news article about AI made me think of this film, scientists are warning about the threat posed by AI development, after watching this film again, I can see where they're coming from.

Harrison Ford is great, perfectly cast as Deckard, another of his iconic roles. Rutger Hauer also manages to captivate and terrify.

This is a classic, quality movie.

9/10.

Still outshines the others 17 years later

[Ivan-28 · 9/10 · 5 August 1999]

Blade Runner belongs on a list of 2 or 3 movies that had me walking out of the theater in a stupor as though hit by a sledgehammer, the first time I saw it. It fulfills one of my requirements of great films in that I walked out of the theater a different person than when I entered. And it fulfilled another requirement in that it improved with repeated viewings.

There is so much to take in visually, intellectually, and emotionally that my mind was overwhelmed at the first viewing trying to sort it all out. Unlike the so-called "entertainment" we get today at the movies, this film didn't spoonfeed its meaning to you. It left the ending ambiguous so your imagination has to supply it.

The film demands discussion. There are so many topics to debate. Is Deckard a replicant? Do Deckard and Rachel live happily ever after? Why is there a unicorn in the director's cut? Is Deckard a hero? Or are the replicants really the good guys? Every time I watch it, my answers change.

I may be one of the few that really likes the original. Probably because I've seen that version a couple dozen times since 1982 before the director's cut came out. This may contradict what I said earlier about being spoonfed, but I liked the narration because it explained what was going on in Deckard's mind. And I didn't mind the "happy ending" because it still implied that their troubles may not be over. "I don't know how long we had together. Who does?" But with that version memorized, I now appreciate the directors cut. It probably has the better ending. (At least I think so until I view it again!)

It's also fun watching actors before they became more famous later like Sean Young, Daryl Hannah, M. Emmet Walsh, William Sanderson, and Edward James Olmos. I think they all did a great job. And Vangelis did a beautiful, moving score.

After "Blade Runner", most of the big blockbuster science fiction movies boil down to good guys vs. bad guys with lots of loud explosions and in-your-face effects. Very simplistic messages, if any. That's why I still contend that an "oldie" like Blade Runner still outshines them all. It has incredible special effects, but never at the expense of the story. The cityscapes do more than dazzle you, they involve you.

The more I think of it, the more I realize that "Blade Runner" is not only my favorite science fiction movie, but one of my favorite films in any genre. I wish Ridley Scott would return to science fiction, but then again today's Hollywood would never release a movie like "Blade Runner."

An incredibly beautiful-looking film as one would expect with director Ridley Scott

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 8/10 · 11 August 2008]

But it's almost like an art movie, the first science-fiction art film It's a futuristic film beautifully put together It's really impeccably made by one of the great visionary directors And you really saw a future that looked very different from the future you had seen before A future that looked very believable like the visual-effects shots of the flying car going over a futuristic city The fight sequence doesn't prepare you for the traumatic emotional side that there is in the film, it leaves you sort of broken

There is a beautiful, delicate emotional great scene that I remember when I first saw the movie I'm in the theater and I'm so drawn in what Rutger Hauer's doing I'm so drawn in by what the theme of the movie has brought us to The magnificent moment where he is letting go of life And in those last moments of letting go of life he's really learned to appreciate life to the point where he spares Deckard's life, and where he's even holding a white dove because he just wants to have something that's alive in his hands It's an amazing sort of crescendo that's going and there's Rutger saying: "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. All these moments will be lost in time like tears in rain." Hauer puts all the things that are so amazing about people: sense of poetry, sense of humor, sense of sexuality, sense of the kid, sense of soul

Scott brought out the best qualities in his performers He coaxed and very gently manipulated performances from his actors that in some instances I think they've rarely topped You feel the story, you feel the emotions of the characters and you will be lost in the middle of this wild world, you know, it's so rich and it's painful I mean it's a very bluesy, dark story and told very compassionately

The overpopulation, the sort of crowd scenes is so rich and varied and there's such an extreme detail designing the magazine covers, designing the look of the punks, the Hare Krishnas, the biological salesman, everything is designed You have just Piccadilly Circus punks walking by You have a sense of layers in that society That is one of those things that you see again and again The city landscape with the big billboards à la Kyoto or Tokyo Scott was able to create the look based on what goes on in various cities all over the world Whether it is Tokyo, Kyoto or Beijing or Hong Kong or whatever, you're right in "Blade Runner" country

"Blade Runner," to me, embodies the elegance, the power, and the uniqueness of a film experience It's the most classical, beautiful, purest movie-making writing and then the film-making itself is The images and the sound and the music, it's pure cinema Ridley came out with an amazing, brilliantly executed future of an absolute dystopia The intensity of his perfectionism on "Blade Runner" made the movie This is a master at his best.

A Milestone Of Science Fiction And A Cyberpunk Masterpiece

[gogoschka-1 · 11 February 2018]

A feast for the eyes. Dark and uncompromising. With a haunting musical score by Vangelis that adds a hypnotic quality to those breathtaking megacity landscapes of future Los Angeles. Ridley Scott's adaptation of Philip K. Dick's post-apocalyptic bounty hunter story 'Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep' is a visionary work of art; it's a dystopian masterpiece and I'd personally call it as much a milestone of science fiction as Kubrick's '2001' (and be advised to watch the version known as the "final cut" if you want to catch 'Blade Runner' as it was intended by its director).

It's hard to overstate how influential the film was; it invented the sci-fi subgenre now known as "cyberpunk", and it was also the first "film noir" in a sci-fi setting. And although it looks so distractingly gorgeous that even today there are people who still dismiss it as superficial and mere "eye candy", it is a philosphically deep film that ponders existential questions about the nature of being human. Its slow, brooding quality will perhaps leave some modern audiences who are used to a different pace and more action underwhelmed - but make no mistake: this is a groundbreaking masterwork of its genre and a timeles classic. 10 stars out of 10.

Favorite films: IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/

Lesser-Known Masterpieces: imdb.com/list/ls070242495/

All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain...

[SantiagoDM1 · 10/10 · 20 August 2018]

Blade Runner describes a future in which, through genetics, artificial humans are manufactured and called "replicants"; employees in dangerous jobs and slaves in the outer colonies of the Earth. Made by Tyrell Corporation under the motto "more humans than humans" -especially the "Nexus-6" models- not only resembles humans, they are far superior physically.

The replicants were declared illegal on planet Earth after a bloody mutiny occurred on the planet Mars, where they worked as slaves. A special police force, Blade Runners, is in charge of identifying, tracking and killing - or "withdrawing", in terms of the police itself - the fugitive replicants found on Earth. With a group of replicants loose in Los Angeles, Rick Deckard, the best agent that has existed in regard to the recovery and removal of the replicas, is removed from his semi-retirement to use some of "the old magic blade runner".

Ridley Scott fantastic dark cyberpunk style and futuristic design is so well made that accomplished to create a visual vocabulary: neon lights, abandonment, decay, loneliness, obscurity, indifference and alienation are the core of the aesthetics of the film, which will eventually become and serve as a pattern for successive cinematographic works.

The script David Webb Peoples adapted from 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' takes the viewer into a dwelling and philosophical controversy, as it creates doubt and empathy to the so called replicants, primarily as seen in many shots of Rick Deckard hesitating about the true nature of his task.

Harrison Ford and Rutger Hauer haunts the attention into the essence of the story. Their characterization throughout infiltrates the different conceptions of life. A saddened soul searching for the meaning of his punished existence and the other, ruminating a task sinking him into a moral void brimming with guilt.

At the end, the movie leaves you wondering about the implications the creation of highly intelligent beings (IA) must have and, if it's worth treating them as machines or they have become so human that the difference is non existent.

"Time... to die".

10/10.

Classic mix of sci-fi and noir

[snoozejonc · 10/10 · 18 February 2021]

Rick Deckard is given an assignment to 'retire' several biologically engineered fugitives.

The plot follows Deckard as he hunts replicants, falls in love and questions his own humanity. It moves slow, allowing you to take in all the sights and sounds of 2019 Los Angeles (as imagined in 1982), whilst pondering some of its themes.

The imagery and dialogue associated with what defines a sentient being and what makes us human is compellingly portrayed. The device used to explore these themes is the genetically engineered humanoid life-form, the godlike status of its creator and the morally compromised nature of the ordinary human. Additionally the number of references to the eyes and linking of what we see and remember versus what is fake and reality, is cleverly mixed into the story. If you want in depth analysis, google 'Blade Runner Themes and Motifs'.

The character of Roy Batty has been interpreted as both a religious and philosophical allegory, but these theories are debatable. He is for me the most intriguing character in the movie and his final scene is one of the most memorable of all time. Along with Deckard, it made me wonder if there is any real difference between humans and replicants. He is portrayed wonderfully by Rutger Hauer who both looks and acts the part.

Deckard is impressively played by Harrison Ford, who is perfect for movies with an emphasis on visuals. Ninety percent of his power as an actor comes from his screen presence and soulful facial expressions. His scenes with Sean Young young are as touching as the action scenes are brutal.

One of Blade Runner's most memorable aspects is its depiction of 2019 Los Angeles, with its permanently dark rainy skies, overcrowding, neon lights, high concept technology, urban decay and environmental devastation. Take away the flying cars and off-world colonies and it's not far off an accurate prediction.

I could write about the atmospheric cinematography, artistic designs and special effects, but nothing I can say would do it justice.

The question of whether Deckard is replicant or human is interesting. There is evidence of both but you must watch and decide. Does it matter? Probably not. If I had to decide, I'd say replicant.

Best movie ever

[imuckenschnabl · 10/10 · 10 May 2020]

Just my personal opinion. Everything is perfect about this movie. I saw the movie the first time when I was 12 and it was mind blowing for me. 38 years later I feel the same about this movie. Timeless and beautiful. For me 10/10 with a star and smile

A glorious, timeless nightmare

[Flagrant-Baronessa · 10/10 · 25 July 2006]

Dark, deep, uncertain, unsettling – imagine the most beautiful nightmare you've ever had – this is Blade Runner (1982).

Ridley Scott's Blade Runner is a brilliantly crafted science fiction film that not only touches upon, but bravely plunges into deep philosophical questions, making it simply ten times more important than any film of its genre. I love it not only for the initial feeling it gives, but because of its perseverance – none of the visuals, themes or technology feel dated but as deep, gripping and current as ever. It is timeless beauty with huge doses of emotion.

Set in 2019 Los Angeles, Blade Runner zooms in on the eerily-lit, urban streets of the city and follows Richard Deckard – superbly played by Harrison Ford who brings an exquisite moral ambiguity to his character – a special policeman who tracks down and terminates artificially-created humans called replicants, who have escaped from an Off-World colony and made their way to earth and need to be stopped. The things Deckard encounters on his detective journey raise many philosophical questions like: Who is really a replicant? Are replicants really bad? If replicants are bad, when why did we go to such lengths with our technology to create them? Are replicants really humans? Is Deckard a hero? This truly is a film that demands subsequent discussion and its ambiguous ending leave a haunting and eerie feeling.

In spite of a rich glaze of science fiction and futurism coating this adventure, there are distinct film noir elements present – primarily in the bluish haze that the film is seen through and its gritty urban atmosphere. Whoever thought of this combination is a genius. Since it is all about technology, it fits then that Blade Runner features a ridiculous amount of product placement, especially from Atari. In any other film, this would have felt out-of-place but here it is simply perfect. The score by Vangelis is strangely gripping when combined with the striking cinematography of the film.

Blade Runner deserves credit, celebration and remembrance for it is simply an excellent film.

10 out of 10 (and I don't just throw this grade out like SOME people)

good atmosphere/ production design, but everything else was weak

[usernumber655321 · 6/10 · 18 July 2012]

This movie is obscenely over rated. It is clear that ALL the attention was given to the production design and overall look to the film, as the script (no matter the 'version') is awful. For a film so raved about by nearly every critic, the plot is cookie cutter and drab. The pacing is, well, there simply isn't any pacing. It is S L O W. The characters are completely uninteresting and the film isn't deep or genuinely philosophical enough to warrant the attention it asks us to pay. There are many parts that are simply goofy and unintentionally funny, like when Rutger Hauer pops his head through the wall towards the end and says something silly, or when Darryl Hannah could have killed Deckard but instead decides to back up and then do a bunch of goofy gymnastics flips in order to give him time to pick up his gun and blow her "guts" out. It is one of my best friend's favorite films and it took a lot out of me to hold my tongue while watching it with him.

A compelling, thematically-deep SF film

[joelhoff · 10/10 · 5 March 2002]

This is truly one of the greatest science fiction films ever made, one that requires a thinking viewer in order to understand and appreciate it. The director's cut is the recommended one to see as it omits a somewhat distracting narration and avoids an unnecessary Hollywood-style ending that is at odds with the rest of the film's tone.

A true science fiction story or film is about ideas, not spaceship battles, futuristic gadgets, or weird creatures. "Blade Runner" fully qualifies as this in its examination of the impact of technology on human society, existence, and the very nature of humanity itself. These themes are set in a fairly basic detective story that moves slowly but gradually builds power as the viewer is immersed in a dystopian futuristic Los Angeles.

Harrison Ford fans accustomed to the normally dynamic roles that he plays may be dissatisfied with the seemingly lifeless lead character that he portrays here as the replicant-hunting detective known as a "blade runner". They should be, for this dissatisfaction is part of the film experience, part of the dehumanized existence in the story's setting. However, as the story unfolds, we see Ford's character, Rick Deckard, slowly come alive again and recover some humanity while pursing four escaped replicants.

The replicants, genetically-engineered human cyborgs, that Deckard must hunt down and kill are in many ways more alive than Deckard himself initially. Their escape from an off-world colony has an explicit self-directed purpose, whereas Deckard's life appears to have none other than his job, one that he has tried to give up. By some standards, Deckard and the replicants have thin character development. However, this is a deeply thematic and philosophical film, and as such the characters are the tools of the story's themes. Each character reflects some aspect of humanity or human existence, but they lack others, for each is broken in ways that reflect the broken society in which they live and were conceived/created.

There are several dramatic moments involving life-and-death struggles, but most of these are more subdued than in a normal detective story plot. The film's power is chiefly derived through its stunning visual imagery of a dark futuristic cityscape and its philosophical themes.

Among the themes explored are the following: - The dehumanization of people through a society shaped by technological and capitalistic excess. - The roles of creator and creation, their mutual enslavement, and their role reversal, i.e., the creation's triumph over its creator. - The nature of humanity itself: emotions, memory, purpose, desire, cruelty, technological mastery of environment and universe, mortality, death, and more. - Personal identity and self-awareness. - The meaning of existence.

If you are not someone who naturally enjoys contemplating such themes, the film's brilliance may be lost on you. The climax involves a soliloquy that brings many of the themes together in a simple yet wonderfully poetic way. Anyone who "gets" the film should be moved by this; others will sadly miss the point and may prefer watching some mindless action flick instead.

"Blade Runner" is a masterpiece that deserves recognition and long remembrance in film history.

Overrated IMHO

[fryguy-88668 · 6/10 · 28 February 2022]

I know it is blasphemy to many, but I didn't love this movie. Somewhat groundbreaking in its use of actual darkness to impart the bleak tone. I'm a fan of Harrison Ford and Ridley Scott. The supporting cast is solid. It's just a bit boring at times.

Timeless

[marntfield · 9/10 · 14 July 2005]

What can be said about this film that hasn't already been covered in preceding decennia? Blade Runner (either version) stands the test of time as an epic story which transcends a disparity of genres, as well as the seminal "dark" sci-fi film which has been mimicked so frequently (to varying degrees of success) since its original release. The interplay of film noir, sci-fi, and what is one of the most philosophically symbolic and academically analyzed narratives of the modern era holds its ground on both visual and cerebral levels even in the face of today's CGI laden blockbusters. The new director's cut, contrary to many cinematic re-hashings, actually serves to clarify many of the more nebulous aspects of the plot and makes a great film even better, arguably allowing it to be modernized and polished for a new generation of viewers who are more picky and yet simultaneously less idealistic. All while sustaining the feeling and flavor of the original. Call it restorative work if you will. The tinny and meandering score by Vangelis is pure 1980s at its most brooding and fits the texture and mood of the film beautifully. Indeed, for many reasons, finding this film in someone's DVD collection makes a true statement about their discriminating and refined taste in movies, and equally their appreciation of film as an artistic medium. I would suggest picking up a reader by someone like Nietzsche, Foucualt, Descartes, Kierkegaard, or any of the great existentialist philosophers after viewing this film in order to appreciate the story & its concepts at a whole new level, regardless if you're watching it for either the 1st, or the 100th time. An enduring classic and an intrepid piece of film-making with rich & often haunting visuals designed to entertain and promote introspection amongst its viewers. 9/10.

Adding My Voice to a Loud Chorus

[Sober-Friend · 7/10 · 13 May 2017]

I was 15 when the film was released in 1982. I remember Gary Franklin (A Movie Critic on Television) gave this film a "10" on a scale of 1 to 10 "10" being best.

When a friend of mine saw this he hated it and so I never saw until 1992. That is when the "Director's Cut" was released theatrically. I was now 25 years. I wanted to see this because I saw a clip on television and someone saying this film was meant to be seen on the "Big Screen" and so off I went.

This cut of the film is most well known for being the version that "Took Away" the Harrison Ford Voice Overs. It also included a shot of a unicorn that implied that "Harrison Ford" is a Replicant.

I was not blown away by this film. I thought it was "good" not "great"

The story does take its time but the rewards are huge if you pay close attention. . Its haunting images are so memorable that it influenced future filmmakers. In more ways than one it became the "Metropolis" of a new era.

From the future setting to having different versions released. "Blade Runner" and "Metropolis" are 2 films one should watch back to back.

Now my problem with "Blade Runner" is that each version is SLOW! The action could of moved faster. The story is very thin. Ridley Scott film is like an old man trophy wife. Pretty to look at but has almost nothing to offer!

So very, very boring.

[remaxmiracle · 2/10 · 16 June 2012]

There were some buildings and then it rained and it's always dark and Edward James Olmos makes some origami and oh, someone shoots another guy, and then it rained and there was a chick dressed to look like Auntie Mame (look it up) complete with 40's style clothes and then it rained and Harrison Ford is in yet another dimly lit room (they don't have lights in the future?) and then there was a half naked lady (boobies!!) who had on some kinky high heeled boots that suddenly turned in to flats so she could run away in the rain...and it rained and oh wait! For some unknown reason we got some kind of hallucination of a running unicorn with no explanation and then There's Darryl Hannah with bad eye makeup and then it rained and some people said some stuff but none of it was really memorable and then it rained and some some nerd and his self made toy midgets did some stuff and then it rained and then Harrison Ford got into a fight with Rutger Hauer and then it rained and Darryl Hannah did some flips and screamed a lot and then it rained and then there was a white dove and some more rain and that about covers it.

A frame to die for.

[jaywolfenstien · 2 February 2008]

I spent a weekend with the new DVD set of Blade Runner. Watched all four versions pretty much back to back (minus the work print version) starting with the US theatrical and finishing with the Final Cut. And across those eight hours I spent with the film, I did not get tired of watching – just watching – that futuristic film-noir vibe: deep dark shadows and majestic use of light and color used to make a run-down polluted cityscape look so beautiful. In fact, when I got to the Final Cut, which had been cleaned up, restored, and remixed, the picture and sound quite literally took my breath away.

Blade Runner is easily one of the best looking films ever made.

In some ways, many ways, Blade Runner strikes me as silly. Particularly in its more climactic moments where the protagonist faces off against a replicant. Pris's acrobatic means of attacking Deckard? When Roy Batty chases Deckard in his shorts (when a few moments before he was fully clothed?) The film goes over-the-top to the point where I find myself asking, "why in the world would the characters do that?!" But here's what's interesting: as silly as Blade Runner may get it never betrays its own world. Everything that happens, in some queer way, feels natural to this strange futuristic world.

I like the movie in its action scenes, but I simply adore it during the quieter moments – the parts where not a whole hell of a lot is happening, and you can simply watch and absorb Jordan Cronenweth's marvelous cinematography. My favorite scene comes when Rachel has saved Deckard's life. An emotional wreck of killing another replicant on top of the revelation that she, herself, is a replicant – she stands by a window where light floods in, so much light that the whole screen goes white, and then it recedes again and we see the characters again. Later in that same scene, she sits at the piano, plays for a bit, and then lets her hair down. Hearing Deckard stumbling in the other room, she looks out of the corner of her eye … and shot after shot after shot through this entire sequence demonstrates absolute mastery over the frame.

Plus some of the other quiet moments resonate with a truer low-key science-fiction feel such as the scene in Tyrell corporation where Deckard applies the Voight-Kampff test to Rachel. More or less a mundane questionaire/interview with a typical sci-fi gadget sitting on the table, but Ridley Scott and Terry Rawlings compacts the lengthy endeavor into a few short moments using a stunningly simple montage.

Later on, Deckard sits in front of a voice-activated screen analyzing a photograph. The task is presented as a dull monotonous job (made especially evident in Harrison Ford's delivery), yet the scene, itself, never bores. The voice-activation not only serves as a staple sci-fi device, but cleverly allows Deckard to take the audience's hand and guide them through this investigative process. And perhaps what I like most about the scene: the audience, and even Deckard himself, doesn't even really know what he's found. Things don't magically fall into place with a Scooby-Doo moment of revelation. He finds another clue that might lead somewhere (albeit, since it's a movie it's a good guess the clue does lead somewhere.) In my mind at least moments such as the Voight-Kampff scenes, Deckard's briefing, the photograph analysis, both of Rachel's scenes in Deckard's apartment gives the world of Blade Runner a solid grounding so later on it can get away with the absurd.

Which brings me to the replicants. Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer) in particular, whose strangely sympathetic in that his murderous tendencies spawn directly from his fear of dying. This is a man who possesses a strong conviction that he deserves life perhaps because he looks around on earth and sees people squandering their existence while he knows he only has a few short moments. Why should a shmuck like Deckard live for 50+ years when Roy in his 4 short years has seen attack ships burning off the shoulder of Orion and seen C-beams glitter in the dark … "If only you could see what I've seen with your eyes," he proudly and warmly tells one of the scientists who helped create him.

As for which cut of the film, I don't think any single one is perfect (and I'd honestly watch any of them in a heartbeat.) I prefer the "Final Cut" over the others and admire Ridley Scott's restraint in his definitive DVD release. Most of the modifications are fine-tuning tweaks the casual viewer won't even notice unless watching two version back to back, and most of said fine-tuning improve the film (although, admittingly, Roy's beckoning of Sebastian could've been left out.) But hell, all versions of Blade Runner are included, so people don't have much room to complain about the changes. And no matter what version you go with, it's still a beautiful film to just … watch.

The Last Great Noir

[cp_spandex · 10/10 · 10 February 2007]

This is a film that is so deep, rich, and multi-layered, it may require more than one viewing to fully absorb the brilliance of what you've just seen. At first glance, it can be a bit slow. It's told in a classic film noir fashion, so this is to be expected. Director Ridley Scott seems to want to savor every shot, and an astute audience will be able to sense this.

Now, I say the film is told in a classic Noir style, but this can be misleading. There is no Humphrey Bogart in Blade Runner, snapping off brilliant one-liners once a second. Only hopeless people, in many ways victims of the merciless world of which they are all a part. Deckard is a typically downbeat protagonist, a hard-boiled cynical leading man with a weakness for heavy drinking. The plot is a mystery in name only, as the audience is allowed to know what Roy Batty, Pris and Leon are all up to before Deckard ever finds out. This only lends to the dread and inevitability of the film, lending further to its pervasive gloom. There is no final scene at the end where the bold detective puts all the pieces together and says "Ah-Ha!". Instead, we find Rick Deckard questioning his own existence and drinking away his constant doubts, all the while embroiled in a romantic relationship with someone he's sworn to kill.

Blade Runner requires audience participation, particularly in the Director's Cut, which is entirely devoid of some rather necessary exposition provided by the Original Cut's much-maligned voice-over. Certain facts will not be clear even at the end of the film, requiring personal interpretation in order to be appreciated fully. Other facts will be given away in much more subtle ways than in most modern cinema, such as through visual cues and tenuous dialogue.

Finally, visually, this movie is quite simply a science fiction triumph. It looks better than modern computer effects in every way that counts. Superimposed special effect objects don't give off that unnatural, clearly computer-generated "Lord of the Rings" sheen common in today's effects-driven blockbusters. This, of course, is because Blade Runner - while a gorgeous movie - is not effects driven in the least. Rather, it is a visually driven story that doesn't rely on special effects. This is an important distinction to make in today's Hollywood.

"Touch of Evil" really wasn't the last of the Great Film Noirs!

One of the greatest Sci-Fi movies of all time.

[NikosMarkant · 10/10 · 25 March 2018]

Blade Runner is perhaps the best sci-fi film and undoubtedly one of the best films of all time. Along with 2001: A Space Odyssey, it is one of the most philosophical and influential movies ever created, as it conveys a plethora of fundamental questions, which are woven in the very fabric of the human essence and existence. It seems near impossible to imagine a more suitable fusion of two of the most successful genres of all time, Science Fiction and Film Noir. By merging together the moral conflict and the emphatic character arc of the private detective, a trait that is exclusive to and definitive of the Film Noir genre, with a futuristic dystopian environment, Blade Runner creates the ultimate Neo-Noir setting, the only one capable of supporting such strong ideas and posing such significant questions to the viewer, without compromising on an interesting plot development and an appealing pace, things that are masterfully achieved via a tight script and persuasive performances.

In a dark, future dystopian portrait of a 2019 Los Angeles, where humans have alienated themselves with their true nature and claimed the title of god/creator of life, effectively manufacturing artificial intelligence and bioengineering androids, called "Replicants", a retired "Blade Runner" named Rick Deckard is assigned with the undertaking of terminating four rogue such replicants that have illegally returned to Earth in a quest to force their maker, Tyrel, into postponing their grim destiny, basically prolonging their already predetermined four-year lifespan. Their greatest sin, however, is having the audacity of desiring one of the most sought-after values in the history of the human species, the freedom to live as they please. In this uneasy and twisted world, the lines between humanness and machinery are blurred and Deckard is faced with the consequences of the realization that not all is as it seems and there is more to "being-alive" than most believe.

Blade Runner's unique depiction of the future has been imitated numerous times quite unsuccessfully, mostly due to the fact that no other film to this date has managed to create such an engaging atmosphere so beautifully connected to every part of it, effectively enhancing every scene and allowing for a strong conveyance of all the moral and existential questions that are posed during the whole duration. The audience is instantaneously absorbed by the vivid and compelling world depicted in the film, and that's where Ridley Scott succeeds the most, offering a glance into an original and somewhat disturbing reality that might very well be humanity's near future. The cinematography is impeccable, the art direction is gorgeous and along with some of the best visual effects that have ever been used in film-making, creates one of the most realistic and visually stunning environments that have ever graced a motion picture to this day. Vangelis has also composed one of the best and most awe-inspiring scores of all time, effectively managing to capture the very essence of each scene, thus making all sound a significant and inseparable part of the whole cinematic experience that Blade Runner has to offer.

This thorough examination of what it means to be human isn't, thankfully, to no avail, as a careful observant, is forced to question their beliefs and attempt to choose a side on dilemmas that are still discussed by philosophers to this day, such as the traits that define humanity, the relativity that characterizes concepts like right or wrong, good or evil, as well as the meaning of life itself. The moral and existential complexity of this reality that Blade Runner has offered to the world reaches depths unparalleled by the majority of the films available, therefore greatly distinguishing it from all others and thus emphasizing its uniqueness through the most complete portrayal of science fiction to date.

Science Fiction Epic

[krishnaraj613 · 10/10 · 9 July 2005]

I have an interest in science fiction films and TV programmes. I like shows like (the original) Star Wars trilogy, (most of) the Star Trek films, as well as Star Trek TV series (Voyager for modern times,preferably, as it had the least number of useless episodes), etc. In my experience, most SF material turns out to be distilled garbage. Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey' was a masterpiece. I am not hesitant to say that I blatantly dislike Spielberg's definition of SF- ET, Close Encounters, & (worst of all) War Of The Worlds. Neither do I appreciate any 'Alien' film apart from R Scott's 1979 original (although Alien2 was OK)-Alien vs Pred is a disgrace not only to all genres, but to the film industry itself. So when I heard of Blade Runner on the net, I wondered; what could be so good about this film? I have HBO,Cinemax, Star Movies- yet this film has never been shown. So, I got myself the Director's Cut at the local video store. I watched it once. Then I re-watched it two days later. My verdict: This film is fantastic.

It is one of the greatest films ever made, on par with 2001: A Space Odyssey. Upon 1st viewing, new audiences may be bewildered. One anticipates a futuristic run-of-the-mill 80's shoot-em-up (in the like of Outland,say). What you get is a film so deep that it is difficult to grasp the 1st time. There is so much symbolism, introverts and questions that I was left stunned. The film is hauntingly beautiful, and I doubt that these screen landscapes could be reproduced today as well as they were here. The plot centres around the question of humanity- something we take for granted. It is not an auctioneer, which was probably what audiences expected when they walked into theatres in the 80s, causing the film to fail commercially. Blade Runner is not for the adrenaline junkie, nor for those who like flashy gadgets and bright explosions, with a healthy Hollywood-made dose of convincing storyline spoon-fed for their satisfaction.

The film is set in the apocalyptic, suggestively post-war future Earth, where there seems to be a lag in technology. Perhaps there was a war which ravaged the world, forcing humans to migrate (the cramped cultural richness of LA), and rebuild, explaining the retro technology. 6 'Criminal' Nexus 6 replicates (genetically engineered humanoids), hijack a ship and come to Earth seeking their maker. These slaves(machines/automatons// regard them as anything which has been created by Man to lessen his burden) have developed emotions, and they fear death for they cherish their memories (Think robots weeping over photographs). Their cause: They want a longer life, they want to experience more, they want to be... human.

Enter Rick Deckard, Blade Runner. His job: kill trespassing replicates; Kill living, breathing humanoids composed of flesh and blood who only have 4 years to live out their miserable lives, seeking haven on Earth rather than serving as slaves in mining outposts on Mars. Kill? Murder seems more appropriate. But that's his job. replicates which trespass are a hazard. These 6 replicates have killed 23 people and hijacked a ship. They have to be killed, right? If you're planning to take sides in this film, you will be pleasantly if not unnervingly surprised. There are no sides. There is no good and evil. Harrison Ford plays the reluctant, burned out Blade Runner very well. His character is drab and dull, as it was meant to be; look at him in the Spinner on the way to Tyrell corporation- pure boredom. He hates his job. If there were any narration, it Should sound dull and uninteresting, reflecting his character. Rutger Hauer gives the greatest performance of his career (so far) in this film, playing Roy Batty, Replicant 'project manager'. He dominates the later part of the film. He is cold, stiff and evil, but in the end speech, one of the Greatest endings I have ever seen, his performance alone makes this film a Classic. The ending is beautiful, and the score by Vangelis is perfect.

All in all, the film is excellent. Well directed by Ridley Scott, innovative and stunning imagery underlined by Vangelis' superb score, and plenty to think about (on your own- no spoon feeding). Check out the trivia for this film; scientists voted it better than 2001:A Space Odyssey. Is the quest for humanity a crime? Find out for yourself. Blade Runner is a Must-Watch, and a Must-Have film.

My rating: 8.9 / 10 Thank you for your time. Kris

All style, no plot

[casstevens-43612 · 6/10 · 9 July 2021]

First of all, I REALLY want to like this movie since I love sci-fi movies. I first saw it in december last year and the movie left me very disappointed. I just rewatched it, hoping that I missed something the first time I watched it, but it didnt get any better on rewatch. I'll start with a positive note ; Everything in this film looks absolutely fantastic. For design and production it gets a 10/10. But asside from that, the movie gives me pretty much nothing else to enjoy. The plot was uninteresting and the pacing was too slow. Besides Rutger Hauers character, all the other characters in this movie were among the most boring and monotone I have ever seen, which makes me not care about any of them. All that happened in the movie was basically just Harrison Ford and Rutger Hauer going from place to place to interrogate people and kill them. I still rate it 6/10 because the design kept me sort of entertained and the final battle was ok I guess. It may sound very controversial but Blade Runner 2049 is a much better movie.

One of Ridley Scott's best

[TheLittleSongbird · 10/10 · 1 January 2011]

Blade Runner is quite simply wonderful, and not only is it one of Ridley Scott's best films, but also one of the best of the genre. For one thing, the visuals are superb. Not just in the special effects which are just mind-blowing but also in the cinematography, colours and sets. Another strong asset is the score, in fact Blade Runner is easily one of Vangelis's best by how mysterious and haunting it all is.

The story is just great. True, it is the sort of film you need to see more than once to understand/appreciate it, but that is not a flaw in any way, quite the contrary. The story is very compelling, and also very deep thematically. Blade Runner is further advantaged by memorable dialogue, superb direction by Scott and good pacing. I can understand why some are underwhelmed by the ending, I was at first, but the more I saw the film the more the ending made sense to me. Finally the performances. Harrison Ford is perfectly cast, and Sean Young supports him admirably, but the real star of the cast is Rutgar Hauer who is outstanding in his role.

In conclusion, a brilliant film and something Scott should be proud of. 10/10 Bethany Cox

Maybe it was cool 40 years ago, but now it feels corny

[viliusnev · 6/10 · 28 June 2022]

If this movie was releases today, it would be considered a comedy. People are howling like wolves for no reason, dialogue is corny and visual effects do not stand the test of time. Premise is kinda cool, but after half of thr movie it just becomes a run and gun film. Also, half of the soundtrack is some kind of sexy sax? Maybe it was cool 40 years ago, but now it feels pretty generic.

Hot take - I would rather watch I, Robot.

New Blu-Ray Disc Made Me A Blade Runner Fan

[ccthemovieman-1 · 9/10 · 7 December 2008]

Sometimes you just need to give a film a second chance, even if it is 20 years later! Only some rave reviews about the picture quality of this new 5-disc "Complete Collector's Edition" enticed me to watch this again. Wow, I am glad; this was a very entertaining and a tremendous visual and audio treat.

I actually appreciated the audio best because, even in this new Blu-Ray era, one doesn't often find a film with very active surround speakers. However, this "restored" version did and the sound is, at the point, the best I've heard on a Blu-Ray disc....or any DVD, for that matter. The visuals? Well, fans of Blade Runner know all about them. They are fantastic. Scene-after-scene reminded me of a Stanley Kubrick film or another bizarre 1980s movie called "Jacob's Ladder."

Because there are so many things to see and hear, and the story is different, one filled with strange characters, I can see where people would watch this film multiple times and enjoy it very much each time. The "Collector's Edition" has the best picture ever, according to director Ridley Scott, and "is the version I'm most pleased with." It has added scenes one didn't see in earlier versions. The rest of the DVD has those earlier versions. Apparently, there are several including those with Harrison Ford doing narration, like out of a late '40s film noir.

Speaking of the latter, that's what this film looked like: a combination film noir (or neo-noir) and sci-fi movie. It has many dark images, fantastic night-time scenes, wonderful closeups and an always-interesting color palette. Sci-fi films usually get dated in a hurry, thanks to ever-increasing special-effects progress in the movie industry, but this still looks very good. Despite being made over 25 years ago, Blade Runner still looks very much state-of-the-art.

Scott says this is the best version and the best his film has ever looked and sounded. Since it's his movie, who am I to argue. So, if you're like me and never gave this movie a chance (I lost interest halfway through with my VHS look at it), give this a second look on this Blu-Ray edition....and you will be blown away. This is, indeed, an amazing film.

I just don't get it....

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 2 January 2012]

I admit right up front that I am perplexed by this film and my review will no doubt annoy a lot of fans of this film. Let's face it, "Blade Runner" is a cult film--and those who like it usually don't just like it--they adore it. I've known several people who insist rather rabidly that it's one of the greatest films of all time. And, when I tell them that I don't particularly like the film, they are confused---'how could anyone not love the film?' often say. In one case, the film lover insisted that I borrow his Director's Cut (one of about 17 different Director's Cuts or Special Editions, I think) because I must have been mistaken. Well, after my second viewing, I did enjoy and appreciate the film a bit more. But I still didn't get the devotion to this film it often receives.

Here is what I liked and didn't like about the film. It had great sets and was VERY other-worldly. While I think the print was a bit too dark, I understand this was done to fit the very dark mood of the film. However, I just felt the film was too dark--oppressively dark...even sadistically dark (such as the eye gouging scene). It completely depressed me--so much so that I found I just didn't like or care about anyone. And, to top it off, the film ended very badly. The director's original ending (where you learn that Harrison Ford's character is also a replicant) would have been so much better. So, this is one case where the Director's Cut is definitely better, as this original ending has been restored. Overall, the film looks impressive and is original--but these alone were not enough for me to give it a glowing endorsement. It's good but that is all.

Am I missing something?

[jacobsearcy-30947 · 4/10 · 1 April 2020]

I made an Imdb account just to leave this review. I was so excited to watch what I've heard many refer to as "the greatest sci-fi film ever made". The only thing keeping this from a 1/10 is the visuals. The atmosphere is great, dystopian Los Angeles reminds me of a vivid terrifying nightmare-scape. Besides that, this is one of the most flat and empty movies I've ever seen. The pacing is never more than a crawl, we are given no reason to care about the characters, and it has the worst quality a film can have: it bored me to tears. A statement could be made that it is not great for its entertainment value, but more so for its philosophical commentary on the future of machines and AI, but the film did an awful job at that as well! I haven't the slightest idea what I'm supposed to have taken from this film. If one enjoys this for the nostalgia factor, go ahead, but if you're new to sci-fi, do not watch this

Too Long Didn't Read: Great visuals, dull and uninteresting script and characters will bore you to tears. Perhaps the most overrated film in sci-fi history, proceed with caution.

Intriguingly Philosophical

[jfitch7 · 6 March 2001]

Blade Runner, directed by Ridley Scott and based on Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, is a Sci-fi slash Noir film about a cop named Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) in a decrepit 2019 Los Angeles whose job it is to "retire" four genetically engineered syborgues, known as "Replicants". The four fugitives, Pris (Daryl Hannah), Zhora (Joanna Cassidy), Leon (Brion James), and their leader, Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer), have escaped from an off-world colony in order to find their creator and bully him into expanding their pre-determined four year life span. This film originally flopped when it came out in 1982, but since has become a widely acclaimed cult classic with a director's cut to boot. A large part of the success that this movie has received can be attributed to its ability to operate on many different levels.

Ridley Scott's hauntingly possible depiction of what might become of Los Angeles down the line is absolutely brilliant. It captures elements of Noir with its urban atmosphere of decadence, lighting, and characters neither clearly defined as good nor evil. Corruption is everywhere. The garbage-littered streets and permanence of dark and rain give us the sense that we've seriously screwed up the atmosphere, and the impression that all respectable human beings have fled to the off-world colonies, leaving only the scum of the earth behind.

There is a hint of style from the 40's, especially with respect to cars, costumes, and music. Rachael's entire outfit, including her hair, screams the 40's.

The soundtrack, arranged by Vangelis (who won an Oscar for his Chariots of Fire score), consisted mainly of Jazz and Blues. This functioned to represent a dark, moody world of uncertainty and pessimism.

The special effects were exceptional. Much of the set was pulled off using models. In my opinion, sets made by hand require leagues more of skill and are much more impressive and realistic than those computer generated. These guys really knew what they were doing. I was especially fond of the pyramidesque Tyrell Corporation building, which hinted at the god-like presence of Eldon Tyrell (Joe Turkell), the creator.

The script (Hampton Fancher, David Peoples, and of course Phil Dick) worked for me, as well as the actors who gave voice to it. Harrison Ford was well...Harrison Ford. I thought he did a tremendous job down-playing the role. His voice-over narration helped you along, and was yet another feature conducive to Film Noir (apparently this was taken out of the Director's Cut). Rutger Hauer's performance was intense. His lines at the end were intriguingly philosophical. Daryl Hannah's chilling robotic expressions were quite impressive. Joanna Cassidy was just plain hot.

There is more to this film than just pulp. It works on so many remarkable levels. The movie itself is a detective noir quest for the meaning of life in a science fiction environment, but the story is a commentary on what it means to be human and the questions each one of us have about life, like: How long have I to live? Why do I have to die? What happens when I die? Doesn't my maker care? Is this all merely an illusion? At the end of the film we are left to wonder if these Replicants are human, and if Deckard himself is in fact a Replicant. Scott raises more questions here than he answers, and as a result, critics are still debating the mysteries of this film today. In a sense, the ambiguity of Blade Runner is the culprit of its success.