Rating: 
Summary: BRING BACK THE ORIGINAL
Review: I don't like the Director's Cut. Anyone know if I can get the REAL movie? helen@ewm.com The narration MADE the movie!
Rating: 
Summary: four stars & a half -- to be exact
Review: In the summer of '82, this excellent movie kept drawing me back to the theater as a college student -- alone, being single. For the sake of comparison, that summer I went to see E.T. -- just once.11 years later, I went to see the director's cut version -- as a married man, with my wife. That night I noticed some of the audience expressed their recollection of the lines from the characters. Then it dawned on me that this movie had become a cult classic, and I had actually become a member unknowingly many years back. The details were rich. The design was first-rated. Doesn't the latest Toyota Prius (a hybrid) look a bit like Deckard's vehicle? The film was based on Philip K. Dick's science fiction novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheeps?" -- also a classic. This movie received some negative reviews by the critics at the time -- understandably. First, the film was summer release, but virtually the entire story took place at night while it was raining outside. Secondly, if the movie had Russell Crowe and Jennifer Connelly in it, the critics might take the film more seriously (not to take credit away from the actual cast). Lastly, the light, the smoke, and the details could be quite distracting to the storyline, in which the audience needed to deal with the concept of "replicant" at an emotional level.
Rating: 
Summary: Beautiful, but main character is unmotivated.
Review: This movie is, visually, an amazing accomplishment. In addition, I love post modern movies with human themes, but the movie will only remain as a cult favorite to me. This is because the main character is unmotivated & forced into a situation; which is an old familiar job. Because of that the main character lacks (& should lack) any kind of spontaneity. In this film, the replicants are the most passionate & emotional compared to the dry & lifeless humans. It's a good juxtaposition to a film that has segregation as its foundation & the quest for purpose as its theme. With only a limited lifespan, the replicants seek the Holy Grail. Being segregated against, they become desperate. During the death of the last rogue replicant, he contemplates on the purpose of all that he's done. In the end, it will vanish, "like tears in rain." The main character, Harrison Ford, is a replicant himself who was previously employed to destroy other "rogue" replicants. He eventually discovers that his dreams & memories have been programmed into him. With the mix of his previously morbid life & this current realization, he finds even less purpose & becomes dry & lifeless like the humans. When he falls in love, however, he is reawakened. I am moved by this because the message of the film illustrates that happiness & vitality are found in compassionate human interaction & meaningful purpose. Yet, it is the technology that has isolated our humanity, which delivers this message. By whatever means this message is delievered, I believe it to be true.
Rating: 
Summary: Mainstream Science Fiction stinks....
Review: This is the problem with mainstream director's approach to science fiction. It's over-kill. You pick the wrong cast, a terrible script, and edit the movie so that it becomes long and tedious, and what have you've got. A terrible movie.
Rating:
Summary: So so DVD, but the greatest sci-fi movie ever made
Review: With 708 reviews there is little more can be said for this movie/dvd. Not to mention most people have seen the movie by now. This DVD was available for the launch of the DVD platform so you have to take that into consideration. Video Quality 3/5
Audio Quality 2/5
Extras 0/5
Movie 5/5 The film itself is generally accepted by many to be one of the greatest Science Fiction movies of all time. It was indeed a film before it's time and was not well accepted by audiences of the day. It has taken on more relevance now after the technological explosion of the 90s and it's legacy still echos in Hollywood 20 years later. Blade Runner is a drama set in a future LA showing the struggles to survive in the oppressive technological environment of the near future. The film at it's core asks the question what is human and is it just our DNA that makes us so? I think this struggle and questions asked in the movie are becoming more and more relevant in our daily lives as we ride the explosive growth of technology over the last 20 years. I can relate in my personal life to a much greater degree to Blade Runner than any other Sci-Fi movie before or since. This is a shame that Hollywood has not done a better job raising the genre of Sci-Fi above the level of juvenile level of spaceships, aliens, and CGI effects. I think Sci-Fi can be so much more than just space ships and aliens and can teach us about ourselves by placing humans in unusual/future environments (as does Blade Runner) Granted, maybe because I work in a technical field and use a computer at least 8 hours a day Blade Runner is more compelling for me. Blade Runner has such a strong impact to me emotionally and at the same time it has a very good plot that includes, action, romance, intrigue, and life and death struggles of almost all the principle characters and their evolution as human beings. This is a fascinating movie which can be watched more than once, unlike most movies in my collection which I have watched but once or twice max and have no desire to watch again for a long long time. Blade Runner is an intriguing and stunning prediction of the human race's future. Will technology steal our humanity as we lose ourselves in the world of machines??? Time will tell if Blade Runner is correct in that prediction.
Rating:
Summary: Bilge-Tripe
Review: I am a huge fan of Sci-Fi. Not to the point where I can tell you the name of the chick's aunt who played Cordelia's third stake in Episode 4,000,258 B of Buffy, but I like the genre just the same, and some of my all-time favourite flicks (Star Wars, Alien, The Fifth Element) are true-blue Science Fiction. Imagine my disappointment, then, upon renting this Director's cut version of Blade Runner, and discovering that not only is it one of the most boring Sci-Fi movies ever made, it's also pretentious and overstated to the point where you really don't care if you never see the end. With a potentially excellent premise - the plot, on paper, is exciting and detailed) and a decent ensemble cast (with Sean Young doing what she seems to do best, playing emotionless characters), Ridley Scott and Vangelis manage to totally negate any character sympathy we might feel through over-the-top panorama shots, long, drawn-out cityscape sequences, and the most awfully Eighties-Fantastic soundtrack ever. Cliches like the Bar sequence abound, and are we really expected to believe Daryl Hannah in her role as the grating, whiney Pris? At least Splash was mute for a part of that movie... One of the most annoying features of this film is the performance given by the usually excellent Harrison Ford. I can imagine Ridley Scott telling Ford to play the role as Indiana Jones-without-Humanity, and that's exactly how he comes across. Boring and wooden, as the central character in a movie whose basic premise is the conflict between humanity and machines, his character is the major flaw in a film full of boring, OTT cliches and unengaging dialogue. One for the Vaults, may it languish there forever more. There are far, far superior examples of Science Fiction available.
Rating:
Summary: An interesting side note....
Review: I haven't noticed anyone commenting on this in any other reviews so I'm assuming this is not a well known fact. But this so-called "Director's Cut" leaves out several of the more violent scenes shown in an earlier Unrated VHS version of the film. These include a graphic shot of the eyeball squish scene, a longer segment of Deckard pulling the nail out of his hand, as well as a few others. Why is the heck would they not include these scenes in a Director's Cut? Doesn't make any sense... BTW, this VHS version has been out of print for quite some time and I have never seen another copy like it, other than the one I purchased "used" from a now-defunct rental store.
Rating:
Summary: Almost My Favorite Movie
Review: I know this has 702 reviews, but I have to put in my two (stars) cents. Blade Runner is probably my favorite movie; but, the Director's Cut is an abomination. The actual difference in footage amounts to something like 7 seconds - big woop. The only significant change is the loss of monologue: a major mistake. The director was miffed at the studios for forcing the issue, and now, decades later, the release of the "restored" version has all but supplanted the original. It's impossible to get a hold of - the die hard fans, not content to be told which version to like, seek out the theatrical release as if it were a rare truffle. I would call the monologues effectiveness a happy accident. In an interview, Ford disclosed that he agreed with the director. He didn't want to do the voice-over. As a result, he read the part as deadpan, monotone as he could, attempting to bore the studio into dropping it. The way it turned out, the reading fit perfectly. For one thing, it gave the movie a voice similar to that of classic detective dramas (something reflected in the sets and costumes, as well). For another, it reflected how dead and empty the main character felt inside - whether that was because he was a killer, a washed up cop, a failure as a husband, or just possibly a replicant with a flimsy emotional crutch imprinted on his memory, didn't matter. Ford's intended sabotage made the character. Without sharing our hero's thoughts, the movie feels disjointed and comes across as annoying. The original had meaning and vitality, but the Director's Cut, was to the jugular, spilling the life-blood of the film.
Rating:
Summary: Either you like or don't like
Review: I liked the movie as originally produced. For those that also do and are afraid to say it; IT'S OKAY TO DISAGREE! The money maker for this film will be a new release with both adaptations and in widescreen format with enhanced sound. Some say the new version more closely resembles the original Dick story. If, by saying that some of the names are the same creates a resemblance, then I suppose that is true. No mater what version you like, the movie is a classic and a great work for your Harrison Ford collection.
Rating:
Summary: How to destroy an excellent film.
Review: As soon as I discovered the film had been "Formatted to fit" my
TV screen I knew I had bought the wrong DVD.
I absolutely detest "Pan & Scan" versions of wide screen movies.
This is a great way to destroy an excellent film which is exactly
what has happened in this case.
Don`t waste your hard earned money on this piss poor product.
| 
