Blade Runner

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.

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.

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/

This is simply Scott's finest hour. There are a sheer plethora of futuristic films with vision. Films which crudely grope into a possible time ahead,when perhaps a post apocalyptic era is scattered with cliché upon cliché and often miss the whole point. What Ridley Scott achieved with this film,is an entirely possible scenario. It really does feel like a science fiction novel brought to life,but not so much as its derivative penned by Phillip K Dick(do androids dream of electric sheep?). Its a grimy,violent world inhabited by the sick,lower class,villainous second citizens who haven't quite made the grade for the off world colonies. We have a true smelting pot of nationalities.The heavy eastern references within china town like inner cities is particularly poignant.

This film also sees Ford in perfect casting.Theirs a rye charm that Ford has that no other actor could fake or fill quite as effortlessly. Its a mixed review depending on what version you have seen. For me,the directors cut is simply too cut. I preferred the audience friendly screening which had the wonderful narration. The finest moment with this narration has to be the moments described by Batty in his dying eyes and the summing up by Ford of this man/machines passion and love for life.. No other sci-fi futuristic film has ever made the grade before or since in my humble opinion. It captured the raw smells and light of a brutal future scarily depicted in films or even so well. From the chase scene with Zora to the flybys over the city capturing a stunning skyline,chimneys and skyscrapers in one shot. This is my favourite movie of all time for all the reasons above and many more i could effortlessly type all day and night.

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.