Blade Runner [Director's Cut]

Rating:
Summary: Oranges and apples. Both versions are good.
Review: The original version has that Maltese Falcon feel that all good Noir films should have, but the director's cut is more interesting. In the new version, Dekkard realizes that he's a r Replicant! By the addition of the unicorn scene, the entire meaning of the movie is changed. Before viewing the Director's Cut, I always had a problem with the Origami Unicorn at the end. It just didn't fit symbolically. I used to assume it meant life--the long life of Racheal, which can work, but it just didn't fit. When I saw the Director's Cut, I was stunned at how the addition of one little scene could change the whole meaning of the movie. Think about it--everthing changes. If you go back and look at the scene where Bryant, the police chief, is explaining the Replicant situation, he is looking at Dekkard weirdly. He knows Dekkard is a "skin job." Gaff says, "You've done a man's job, sir." after Dekkard has killed Roy Batty. Maybe Dekkard has Gaff's memories implanted in him. Also, if you look at the scenes where Dekkard is flying to the Tyrel Corp. building, he seems amazed by the scenery going by. Everything changes with the addition of the Unicorn Scene. After killing Priss, Roy Batty asks Dekkard, "Are you proud of yourself little man?" this suddenly becomes ironic because he isn't a man he's a brother Replicant.

Rating:
Summary: Lack of 5.1 sound hurts
Review: Blade Runner is a fantastic, thought provoking movie. The video quality on the DVD is excellent, but the lack of 5.1 sound, and lack of special features hurts the overall package somewhat.

If you've already got this on VHS, there's no real reason to buy the DVD (unless your VHS copy has worn out with use, of course).

An excellent movie, though.

Rating:
Summary: Best Sci-fi movie EVER made!
Review: A wonderful musical score also

Rating:
Summary: I wanna be a Bladerunner
Review: Tell me all the good things that you remember about this movie... We watched this movie repeatedly on cable tv back in 1984 while we were in college. I vividly remember it as one of the most haunting and captivating films I had ever seen. Late at night, the whole picture seemed to flow right out into the always darkened room, meeting and penetrating a spellbound audience. It was, and still is, almost impossible not to grab a glass and join Deckard when he pours that drink in his apartment. I thought I had scene everything in the movie over the last 15 years, until I bought the DVD version. STUNNING!!!! It was like watching an entirely different movie, scenes behind scenes, behind scenes. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? I think they do. Get it, watch it.

Rating:
Summary: Good
Review: Well, I rented the originial and bought the director's cut. Not much difference, although the origanal had Decker's narration, not much, and also had one more scene at the end, where we see Decker and the woman riding off in the sunset. Also the director's cut adds a scene involving Decker dreaming, and the scene where a Nexus 6 squeezes a man's eyes out is from a less gory angle. Which is better? doesn't matter. see both.

Rating:
Summary: So much for the electric sheep...
Review: Okay, on its own merits this is an okay film, but the fact that it completely bastardizes Philip K. Dick's wonderful Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, the novel upon which it was based, more or less totally ruined it for me. Virtually all of the rich layers of reality, religious allegory, and *many* significant plot points were completely absent from the film. One of the main characters, Jack Isidore, was entirely eliminated, and the shared messianic experiences and electronic animals were also gone. Also, Rick was married in the novel.

If you're going to see this, you should definitely read the novel as well--it's a much richer experience.

Neat-o special effects, though.

Rating:
Summary: Liked the happier ending in the theatrical release better.
Review: Very good movie, but didn't care for the depressing ending in the "Director's Cut". Of course, Harrison Ford was outstanding.

Rating:
Summary: "If you don't do it right first off, don't do it at all!!!"
Review: "One of the best sci-fi movies ever made. Doesn't possess the same themes as the original novel (aka my 'Jurasic Park' theory of book adaptations) by author Philip K. Dick, 'Do Androids dream of Electronic Sheep?' but it is great all the same. Theme of: 'What is it that truely makes us human?' is timeless. Great art design and futuristic vision of the heights and depths of what humanity is possible of achieving (space exploration vs. the creation of a slave race). Original version with voice-over narration is better. Why? Because the character speaks with his own voice (HELLO SHAKESPEAREIAN DEVICES--Yeah William I think it ***** that we get a glimps into Hamlet's psyche)! I wish they would bring the original back on video for sale because I missed buying it while it was out in stores (stupidity on my part)! One of Rutger Hauer's best roles in a sci-fi movie ('The Blood of Heroes' is a great one too) as the android-replicant 'Batty.' I like the widescreen feel of the Director's Cut but only 3 stars because of what else was cut out. A definite 5 stars for the original even with the different themes that are stressed in the movie than the in novel."

Rating:
Summary: The Director's Cut is much better than the original release!
Review: The Unicorn Dream sequence ties together at the very end of the movie......is Rick Deckard a Replicant also? Excellent scenery and eerie lighting make for a great backdrop. Computer imaging way ahead of its time. mms

Rating:
Summary: New release sets the tone of mystery.
Review: The Director's Cut of Blade Runner returns the sense of mystery to the film. Too much explanation is not a good thing, can you imagine if 2001 A Space Odessey had a voice-over narration? I can remember everyone having an opinion about what that monolith really represented. In this film, the very obscurity of the plot line lends an air of other-worldly substance, that narration made it more of just another detective story. Another thing, I can remember a review way back when stating that the film had be cut almost a full hour, I had expected that this version would have restored a lot of that time, what's the scoop?