Rating: 
Summary: Good, not great
Review: The director's cut of Blade Runner is a fine film, but I'm mystified by the fanatical devotion that it inspires. I've numerous friends, whose opinion on film I respect, that get really worked up when I rank a sci-fi film like GATTACA above Blade Runner. I liked a number of things about the film myself - the theme, Ford's performance, the film-noir tribute - but several flaws keep it from greatness. Some of the dialoge, while elegant, is unbelievable, much of the science behind the fiction is way off and the casting is just plain wacky. The director's cut does add greatly to the aspect of this film that I enjoyed the most - hints that Decker (Ford) may not be who he thinks he is. I would not recommend bothering with the original release version.
Rating: 
Summary: A classic in the genre.
Review: Blade Runner, based on the Novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Phillip K Dick, is an insightful tale for those of us who have ever felt that the marvellous creation we call life is over far too soon. The story involves a certain Rick Deckard, played innocently by Harrison Ford who manages to fit in perfectly in tune with the Noirish theme of the movie. He has been assigned to "retire" dangerous Nexus 6 replicants, Off-world colonists who are seeking to increase their 4 year life span. Rutger Hauer is magnificent as Roy Batty, leader of this group. There is also Daryl Hannah, who portrays Pris. Quite what made Ridley Scott decide to choose her must have been a mystery to WB, but she remains the gem in this movie, neither outdoing nor detracting from the main characters. Blade Runner remains my favourite movie of all time, however, I am a stalwart and the original still seems slightly better... Nevertheless, I feel that once you have seen the movie, you will want both versions. A monumental movie, and as such, deserves never to slip into obscurity, for it is the greatest Film Noir of all time.
Rating: 
Summary: What happened to the variety - consumers should decide!
Review: My family purchased a VCR many years ago. Cable TV was only in my part of town for a few months. I was young and the first movie I snuck a recording of was the ORIGIONAL Blade Runner with the voice over narration and what many call the "phoney happy ending". Ford's narration seems to give the movie a little character by explaining his thoughts throughout his life as B26354. Now I don't really care for the origional ending, but what gives with the unicorn dream? The director's cut's ending seems to give the movie a "Well, we're out of film" cut-off image. Overall, in my opinion, both versions of the Blade Runner film should be offered in stores/online and let the public decide which is better. I'm hesitant to buy the Director's cut because of the changes from what I know. The movie in general is awesome, just give the public the ability to choose which way their version of awesome should be.
Rating:
Summary: Blade Runner the way it was meant to be seen.
Review: I recently bought a DVD player and this was one of the first DVDs on my wish list. I really like the director's cut of this film and the DVD version is much better than the VHS DirCut. This is a really great film.
Rating:
Summary: the best scifi picture of the century
Review: Bladerunner is based on a book by Philip K. Dick called "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep". To fully understand this film you need to read the book. After reading the book you won't beleive how much more there is to the story. I first fell in love with the movie, ( and by the way I like both versions, each has something different to offer)and years later I read the book. Now I love the movies even more. I consider this to be the best scifi film of the century! To all the other fans I can only say " READ THE BOOK NEXT!!"
Rating:
Summary: Now classic cyberpunk movie
Review: I'm not getting into the argument about which version is better. It seems there's a lot of emotion flying about but suffice to say that each to his own, and as long as you enjoy it. I think this movie is based on a novel by Stanley Kubrick (I think??? Correct me if wrong!) called 'Do androids dream electric dreams' (another book I've never got round to reading). In terms of casting, this film about did it perfect. Harrison Ford was, naturally, the choice for the cop, with Rutger Hauer providing the performance of his life. Each of the other androids are played beautifully, especially Darryl Hannah's unusually cast role as a sex droid, capable of breaking a mans head between her thighs. The music is almost definately a classic - it drifts along catching the ear, slightly permeating the feel of the city, it's rough streets awash with grime. There are several classic scenes in this movie; the snake womans (painful) demise (who'd of thought death could appear so disgusting and beautiful, yet its a robot...), 'Time to Die', the final moments for Ford and his new lover. I think you'll be hard pushed to find anything close to this in it's genre, and for me personally it rates in my top ten favourites (somewhere). Buy it, watch it, love it.
Rating:
Summary: Subtle, beautiful, Film can express complex ideas visually
Review: I've always been taken with this film visually, but on this last viewing... Well, IMHO this is a true work of art. First, remember this was only 3-4 years after the first Star Wars breathed life back into the genre. Blade Runner is light years (ahem) ahead in terms of visuals, acting, camera work - the basic criteria for film evaluation. Then, due to the conceptually pregnant "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" it is also a film about Ideas. Ridley Scott (who came out of British Television commercial work) is the master of mood, and this film proves it, suprisingly with pacing as good as the best of Wenders or Ozu. All this adds up to what Schrader would call a trancendent expression - a film that trancends its normative bounds (and, honestly the "happy" ending would be a classic Schrader break in visual style. Typically, Film is considered more emotional, more visceral, able to tap into our gut directly through the eyes (I only do eyes, you nexus 6? I make you eyes). By holding the camera, moving the light, pausing between lines, focusing on reaction rather than action (Decker after Rachels 100th question, St.Sebastian after Roy steps in, Pris' growling no), Scott gives us a meditation on existance, (More Human than Human is our motto) and a cautionary look at the future. Read also David Harvey's analysis in "the Condition of Postmodernity"
Rating:
Summary: Not the only version.
Review: Don't get me wrong. I love the movie. I just don't find the director's cut very enjoying. I purchased an extended version of the movie on VHS a long time ago that kept the origional format, but added scenes that were cut from the theatrical release. I like having the commentary by Decker (Harrison Ford) and I like the extra scenes. I think that the extended version should be formated to DVD so that Blade runner fans could have a little variety.
Rating:
Summary: The future may be dark yet sublime
Review: When Blade Runner initially was released for public viewing I went and saw the film with no expectations or pre-existing understanding of what the film would offer. I was unable to concentrate and eventually left nonplussed. A few years later I went with some friends to a midnight screening and was dumbfounded. I realized that the film was a work of brilliance and I could not believe that upon first viewing I was unable to grasp that now obvious fact. One could write a full-blown treatise on the implications of man acting as god or machine desperately trying to take the path of man. Suffice it so say that, when replicant Roy Batty states to his maker, Tyrell, "I want more life,f**cker,' he speaks for the majority of mankind,past and present. One can also see strands of Huck Finn in Deckard's character as he is forced to reconsider the values of broader society--values which suggest that the creation and virtual enslavement of a 'race' of beings is not only reasonable but desired--values which require that Deckard hunt them down like escaped slaves with destruction the punishment. How about false memories as a method of emotional control acting as a surrogate for religion. When was the last time you went to a theatre and were entertained by top-notch special effects, a decent detective story, political and existential theories, and the beautiful if cantankerous Sean Young? Never. To the poster below: Replicants have been implanted with memories which are supposed to represent real-life experiences from a past they never actually had--as you know, personal experiences and memories are both volatile and extremely varied in detail--when a replicant is asked of its mother, it has only a limited ability to respond because it had no actual mother or past experiences of that sort and must thus rely on relatively limited resources when answering--further, while a replicant may have been implanted with false knowledge of a turtle, for instance, having ostensibly spent an entire existence off planet, it is difficult to imagine that a replicant would have supplemented false memories with any actual run-ins with a turtle, never mind the possibility of recognizing what a tortoise might be. Questioning a replicant about things or experiences that they have only limited knowledge of exposes them as their responses are skewed by their ignorance. Likewise, during the film their growth as beings with real-world experience is marked by their improvement in the expression of emotion, even in the subtlties of the usage of profanity. Any way, aside from my pedantic blathering, a truly fantastic film.
Rating:
Summary: Science Fiction for the Brain
Review: For the most part, I dislike scifi. However, BLADE RUNNER is a masterpiece of visual design and director's vision. I have not seen the original version, but I know that a voice over would only have harmed the overall effect of BLADE RUNNER. This is a film that is meant to be interpretated as the viewer likes, not to be confined within the plot, as a voice over device would do. This is a film that is innumerably times better than STAR WARS simply because STAR WARS has no deptth.
|
