Rating: 
Summary: A DIRECTORS CUT WASNT NEEDED
Review: I have a fairly unpopular opinion that the directors cut is only praised because people think different is better. I happen to like the voice over narration and think it only adds to the noir feel to the film. Sure, the movie works without it too, but that doesnt necesarrily make it so much better like most people claim. Chandler, Woolrich, and all the other great noir writers of the past almost always, with very few exceptions, wrote in first person narration. The studio's descision to add the narration, despite Ridley Scott's objections, in the end, I think, helped the movie move and increased the noir tone. Just because a director loses final cut, doesnt mean that the end product isnt a great movie. People used to be perfectly happy with the original, but then they all jumped on the director's cut bandwagon. I think if people really sat back and compared the two, the directors cut of Blade Runner, in the end, really isnt all that special. Give me the original.
Rating: 
Summary: A fully necessary Director's Cut that improves the original
Review: The mainstream of Director's cuts are invariablely just a few extra scenes to satisfy tyhe self importance of the director who wanted to include them orgianally, but was overruled by the producers. Such examples include the recently released Pretty Woman, with just a few more minutes of footage that make the film no worse, but then again no better. Then there are a couple of Director's Cuts that really shine. One is Aliens and the other is Blade Runner. Such gems increase the depth and meaning of a film. Although not very successful back in 1982, thanks to a mauling from the critics, Blade Runner still set the standard for 80's sci fi and the noirish gloom of big cities was copied a million times, most notably copies of this style were Terminator, Highlander and Robocop were. The same rain drenched, dark Metropolis was even used in a present day thriller, Seven. Although the film grew to be as influential as Star Wars and 2001, it wasn't without faults. The awful voice over, much of it unnecessary and spoken badly by Ford, and the phoney happy ending that was made up from off-cuts of The Shining were the main two. Too criticise Ridley Scott for these errors is very unfair. He had an awful time with the producers and was even removed before the final cut back in '82 However this directors cut (still far from his desired version, by all accounts), dispenses with the voice over and thus adds a couple of new scenes to compensate the narrative. It also includes a less optimistic ending and a wierd unicorn dream sequence that COULD, in relation to the ending, be the answer too Deckard: Human or Replicant? Its a brilliant improvement that adds more depth to the film numerous subtexts (Deckards Humanity or lack of, the key to one's own identity) and allows the full masterpiece to shine through, uninhibited. If you haven't seen either version, see the Director's cut first and then the original if you're curious.
Rating:
Summary: DVD presents Blade Runner as the sympthony it is!
Review: Classic film as we all know, and what a delight to see the sharpness of detail in all the cityscapes! Also, I totally agree with the reviewer who points out that the voiceover in the original version adds a depth to Deckard that is lost on the Directors Cut. I would even go as far to say that the "sunset ending" provides a breath of fresh air after a heavy film...and no, I am not a movie exec. If you like BR get the disc!
Rating:
Summary: Grey Matter
Review: This is a film which requires its audience to think. If you like your films with simple plots, gung ho action, witty repartee, loads of one-liners then forget this one. This film requires an understanding of human nature, an understanding of the world around you and the imagination and intellect to fully appreciate the nuances of the film. From Harrison Ford's 2body language" character through to probably Rutger Hauer's most stunning performance this film outclasses and outstrips anything before it. It has yet to be equaled in intelligence and its ability to be thought provoking. The film portrays both the decaying Earth and the decay of its inhabitants. The irony of "machines" seeking humanity while humans lose their humanity is only one of the many subtle ideas throughout the film. My only complaint is the number of people who talk about the ending but miss the point. This is one to sit in a bar and discuss for hours on end. So take my advice and think your way through this film. On the negative side the DVD is disappointing because of the lack of features. I would have thought this would have been the perfect opportunity to place both versions side by side. In spite of all the publicity the original is no less valid.
Rating:
Summary: Best SciFi Flick to Date
Review: The directors cut is a must on this. The silly voice over is gone and the ending lifted from old 'The Shining' footage is not there. It becomes truly cyberpunk in this incarnation. If you view the original theatrical version it is good but not much more than that.
Rating:
Summary: The greatest sci-fi film of all time.
Review: My favorite part of this movie is the dream sequence that Deckard has about a unicorn running through a meadow. That makes you think: Is Deckard a replicant? Interesting, huh.
Rating:
Summary: Phenomenal. One of the greatest films ever made.
Review: I have seen both the original and the director's cut several times. Both are equally good. The lack of voiceover in the latter makes the film even more of a visual feast and allows the viewer's thoughts and imagination to play a greater role. On the other hand Ford's voiceover nicely communicates Deckard's sense of loneliness, futility, love, indignation, etc. After my first viewing I became a fan of Rutger Hauer. It really is a shame that he has been cast for the most part in crappy B movies. The film operates on so many symbolic, philosophical and sociological levels, it could be made the subject of numerous PhD dissertations. Morality, Mortality, Consciousness & Memory, Identity, Urban Environments, Commercialism, Capitalism, Love, Human vs. Non-Human, and so on. It is worth owning this one because you will undoubtedly view it many times.
Rating:
Summary: Undeniably one of the best ever...
Review: Tons, tons, and TONS of subtext here. True and pure cinematic art. Having read the book (although loosely translated) will help understanding. As for the director's cut: it is AMAZING how a simple, 15-second shot of a unicorn can change ... well, everything. When you watch this, ask, "Is Deckard a replicant?" Also keep in mind: The movie, like the book, is not about a guy who runs around killing Replicants. It is about what it is to be human. The only reason I can think that this did not do well at the box office is because it is very 'heady.' Drop 2 or 3 stars if you do not like to think.
Rating:
Summary: Great for its Time...
Review: Correction to davisi211@aol.com, Ridley Scott directed the movie. Phillip K. Dick wrote the book "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". The movie was done along the lines of the book, dark and moody. For its release, 1982, it was a great movie even with the narration. The directors cut, of course put it over. A True Classic!!
Rating:
Summary: Simply, the greatest movie ever made...
Review: There's no point in trying to summarize or describe it. I've seen all the movies the critics say are the greatest: Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind, Casablanca, 2001: A Space Oddysey, and, to be honest, I think Blade Runner is better.
| 
