Rating: 
Summary: Like Tears in the Rain
Review: By the time Roy Batty dies, he has made peace with his engineered fate, that his manufactured four-year lifespan was ending. Upon relinguishing his life, Batty releases the dove he had been clutching, his soulful metaphor, which escapes into the gray sky. The implication is that Batty's compassion for Deckard manifested his humanity, and thus earned him an afterlife. It was a poetically masterful conclusion to a cinematic masterpiece of science fiction. Most fans of science fiction will agree that this is one fine film, proof of what can be done with the genre when it's taken seriously, as something that can appeal to grownups. About that, we can pretty much concur. The contention begins when we discuss which version is better: The original theatrical release, or this Director's Cut. Look at some of these other reviews and you'll see what I mean. The theatrical version is now out of print (it was on VHS). I have it and I've seen it countless times. I also have this Director's Cut DVD, and I've seen it countless times, too. What some of the other reviewers have failed to mention, or have glossed over without explanation, is HOW the two versions differ. First, the noir-like voice-over is omitted in the Director's Cut, as was Deckard's fly-away escape with Rachel, the final scene in the original. Second, there is an added scene in which Deckard falls asleep at his piano and dreams of a unicorn running through a verdant wilderness. Though they seem minor changes, these omissions and additions change the movie to the degree that the two versions are entirely different films. In the original, Deckard's and Rachel's escape implies their living happily ever after. In the Director's Cut, Deckard himself is a replicant, he and Rachel both doomed by the four-year lifespan. To fans of the original film, the conclusion of the Director's Cut is hard to swallow. I know: I was one of them, and when I first viewed the Director's Cut, I didn't even see what is now glaringly obvious. Viewing the original edition so often had biased my perceptions; I simply couldn't see it in any way other than how I initially interpreted it. But via discussions in the Blade Runner newsgroup I came to think and accept otherwise. Deckard was a replicant. The proof is distilled from three points: Deckard's dream of the unicorn; the memories implanted by the replicants' manufacturers into the minds of the replicants to give them a sense of an extended lifespan; and the final origami -- a unicorn -- discovered by Deckard as he and Rachel escape. There are other clues, for sure, but these cinch it: Deckard's dream was known to someone besides himself, just as he had known Rachel's private memories in detail, because they orginally belonged to Tyrell's niece. After a period of adjustment, I've come to prefer the Director's Cut. It's a more nuanced film. Also, this is truer to the director's vision, and that's a good thing in this case, like a mistake corrected. It's less happy-ending Hollywood. I haven't watched the original version since I bought this DVD. As for the DVD itself, it's a two-sided disc, with a widescreen presentation on one side and fullscreen on the other. The image quality is superior to that of the VHS edition, of course. The yearning soundtrack by Vangelis, so integrated into the whole experience, is enhanced by the digital rendering. For DVD extras, there's not much here in the form of special features -- "production notes" the only real extra, stuff you read; not really that special -- but for now, this is the only available edition of this great film. And it's more than enough, if you love films by directors with visionary ambition. On a hopeful note for those of you favoring the original theatrical release, I understand there's a special edition DVD package planned that'll include both versions of the film, both digitally corrected in a couple of spots -- those of us cult-like aficionados are painfully aware of some glaring continuity errors -- along with a few other goodies as extras (REAL extras, such as a director's commentary). But there's no official release date as of yet. For now, if you don't have the original release on VHS you're tough out of luck. But having to settle for this Director's Cut isn't a bad deal: It's as close to the director's original vision as you'll get for now.
Rating: 
Summary: Release the theatrical version already!
Review: Of course, in the DVD format, there is no reason there should not be a director's cut release. But there are legitimate reasons that people might prefer the theatrical version. I found the director's cut to be flat without Ford's ironic noir-style narration. A lot of the classic lines from the film are from the voiceover narration, which does not appear in the director's cut. And personally, I don't feel the original ending was a "Hollywood happy ending" either. They are driving off into the wild blue. Whether Rachel lives 100 years or 4 years, it is not going to be a bowl of cherries. That's just the point. Deckard didn't know how long she would live, or how long he would live. That's life. And now they are fugitives. This is a happy ending? For me, Deckard was not an android and never will be. He was a crotchety, burned-out human blade runner who fell in love with an android. So I will add my voice to the chorus of people begging for a proper DVD release of the theatrical version. There is no excuse for its unavailability. The public should have its choice, just as it did in VHS. I personally own the laserdisc release of the theatrical version, and visually the mastering is not that great. We need the DVD. But hear me now, Mr. Ridley Scott, you cannot make me buy your director's cut.
Rating: 
Summary: Often imitated, never replicated
Review: "Blade Runner" had a very odd theatrical release: the first audiences saw different versions of the film (the studio recut it depending on what they heard from moviegoers). Just goes to show you - never rely on what the average viewer says. "Blade Runner" is much, much better without the hokey, noirish voice-over and uplifting finale. Harrison Ford, by his own admission, said he hated the narration and deliberately botched it (so the producers kept it, natch). And isn't it common coin in Hollywood to jam in a happy ending? Fortunately, the trend of "director's cuts" came along at the right time. The real "Blade Runner" could have easily languished in Warner Bros. vaults while fans put up with the Embassy VHS (which I own) and subsequent DVD transfer. As of this review, most people hate the DVD handling, but the "Director's Cut" VHS is worth keeping your VCR around. The film is the superior vision of life on a downward spiral, and its dizzying, tantalizing glimpses of a not-so-futuristic megalopolis are arresting. After reading Philp K. Dick's novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" and seeing the movie, it is obvious that the original message about replicated humans is far more ominous than the original theatrical version can convey. The burning question is obvious: is Ford's character a replicant himself? Does his brutal dispatch of the dangerous androids represent murder, or just disposal? In the end, the fantastic, impossible world created by Dick, and made flesh by Ridley Scott, is the real draw of "Blade Runner." To rely on a voice-over for plot clarity is to miss the point. Vangelis' score and myriad aural touches add to the oppressive atmosphere. Subsequent sci-fi films have copied the "Blade Runner" look; all of them pale in comparison. Even if the studio were to somehow cobble up a sequel, it'd never recapture the look or feel of the real thing.
Rating:
Summary: Not quite the Blade Runner I remember
Review: After purchasing and viewing the DVD director's cut release, all I can think is "where can I find the original theater release version". I sat my family down to watch it two nights ago and they lost interest very quickly. While it is still visually stunning to watch, it is not enough overcome the seeming lack of narrative/plot. In fact, one of the key things removed from the director's cut version is the voiceover narrative by Harrison Ford's character Deckard. For those that know the original version, it can even be a challenge to remember the significance of each scene. For new viewers of BR, they're left wondering, scene after scene, "OK what just happened and what relevance does it have to anything?". Bring back the voiceover!
Rating:
Summary: THE FUTURE IS DISMAL - SO IS THE TRANSFER!
Review: Ridley Scott's "Blade Runner" is an apocalyptic postmodernist vision of the future. The story involves a bounty hunter, Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) who is assigned to kill three replicants - android style robots that look identical to humans, but who have come to earth to seek revenge on their creator - Eldon Tyrell (Joe Turkel). Sean Young costars as Rachel, the latest model of replicant who is so incredibly life like that not even she knows that she's not human. Also in the cast are Rutgar Hauer as Roy Batty - the ultimate killing machine, Edward Olmos as a drugged out police detective, Gaff, and Darryl Hannah, as the psychotic replicant, Pris. Flawed in its narrative, but visually stunning, "Blade Runner" has developed a cult following - and it is easy to see why. The production is layered with multi-references to the steady moral and social demise of our own society that stir the mind into rethinking this movie as much more than a sci-fi adventure. This version of the film is the re-edited director's cut that audiences were never shown in 1982. The subtle tweaking of story and plot elements really doesn't enhance one's viewing experience so much as it just alters the story in a different direction.
But what a shame about the transfer! Though the general color balancing and attention to fine details, even in the darkest scenes, is adequate, there is simply NO EXCUSE for leaving the chips, scratches and in some cases, tears in this DVD transfer. Pixelization crops up now and them, but the most disturbing part of the transfer is that it fails to pay attention to the dirt and (in some cases) hair, stuck to the film negative. The result is a dirty looking picture that, while perhaps in keeping with Ridley Scott's vision of a dank, hard universe of the future, is most definitely not what the director had in mind. Saving grace: the transfer is anamorphically enhanced for widescreen televisions. The sonic characteristic of the 5.1 audio is rich, though dated. Strong bass and reasonably well balanced dialogue and effects, though there are a few perceived occasions where dubbing in of dialogue sounds possible. And one final insult from Warner Brothers, this disc has NO extras - not even a theatrical trailer!
Rating:
Summary: Good, but without the narrating it drags
Review: Blade Runner is a good movie. It's interesting and different. The set design is really good. Especially near the end of the movie.
The actual director's cut is a little too slow at times. Without the commentary, parts of the movie are a little boring as people do stuff you don't care about. With the commentary by Harrison Ford, you don't really pay attention to that stuff.
It's a good movie, but wait for a better edition.
Rating:
Summary: Blade Runner
Review: This film, while rather dark in both its photographic technique and its genre, has all the characteristics of the old-time movies: good-looking actors, stylized dialogue, depiction of good-versus-evil struggles, followed by redemption of one of the worst characters, and in the end the guy gets the girl. What more could a movie fan ask for? The scenes of mayhem and ghoulish actions of the "bad" guys are portrayed with deliberation and finesse by Rutger Hauer and his minions. For fans of the limb-flexing Daryl Hannah, her portrayal of the sexy replicant is quite fetching - she combines just the right amount of innocence with a ruthlessness of purpose and total allegiance to her leader. The casting of this movie was perfect; the proof being that their portrayals have withheld the test of time. This was one of the earliest movies for almost all the main characters, all of whom went on to do many more films. The theme of hope and love that Blade Runner exemplifies has to appeal to the romantic in each of us - yet Harriston Ford gives it just the right amount of cynicism at the end to make us wonder what happens next. That is the true test of excellence in any movie.
As for the infamous "3-Disc DVD" rumor, various sources are reporting those involved in the DVD's production say legal issues have halted it :(
HOWEVER, According to DVDTalk.com forums, there's supposed to be some sort of release is coming in 2005, but it ain't the BIG edition that is in Limbo due to legal issues. Maybe just a 2 disc set of the current DC. NY Times (12/13/2003): The avidly awaited, definitive version of Ridley Scott's science-fiction classic, "Blade Runner," won't be out on DVD anytime soon for stranger reasons. When "Blade Runner" was being shot in the early 1980's, Bud Yorkin, a veteran television comedy producer, and Jerry Perenchio, now the C.E.O. of Univision, were the film's bond-completion guarantors. When the film went over budget, by contract they assumed ownership of the film. Paul Sammon wrote in his book "Future Noir: The Making of `Blade Runner' " that they hated the film, had bitter disputes with Mr. Scott and tried to take it away from him altogether. The studio release, in 1982, contained superfluous narration and a tacked-on rosy ending. Mr. Scott removed both when he was allowed to make a "director's cut" in 1992, but it was, by his own account, a rush job. Three years ago, Mr. Scott announced that he was working on a three-disc box set, which would offer all the versions of the film, including a new and polished director's cut with previously unseen footage and scads of bonus features. Then, at the end of 2001, Warner Brothers, which was planning to distribute the discs, pulled the plug. It did so, according to a producer who worked on the project, because Mr. Perenchio gave no sign that he would let them be released. Mr. Perenchio, speaking through an assistant, had no comment on the situation."
Rating:
Summary: Directors cut not as good
Review: Personally, I prefer the original release. I liked the voice over and the happy ending. I thought the Unicorn dream thing was kind of off the subject. I've been trying to find a copy of the original release but no luck so far. Overall the movie is still one of my favorites of all time. I even had the PC Game. Directors cuts aren't always better in my opinion, look at the crap they are releasing for Star Wars these days with scenes added that are no use to the plot and most are so obvious. The only recent extended version of a movie I really enjoyed was of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. These extended versions were fantastic. But still, if you like Sci-fi I think Bladerunner is a winner.
Rating: 
Summary: Wasn't FILM NOIRE the WHOLE point of this film?
Review: From the moment that I saw this film in '82 until today, it's remained among my favorites. For the life of me, however, I cannot understand why the director eliminated the narration from this film.
Many of you may not know this, but there once was a movie genre called FILM NOIRE. These movies usually involved a really good, loner type detective, like "Sam Spade" or the like. He would walk you though the film using narration that highlighted what he was thinking while you watched him perform his investigative duties with a featureless "poker face" to fool the bad guys.
Periodically, and most often impersonated, the detective would "step out" of a scene he was in and talk to the audience instead of narrating over the action. Perhaps you've seen old Bogart films where he'd stand under a light pole in the rain and recite a monologue to the audience about how he felt the case was going or to highlight another character's actions, behaviors or personalities according to him. THAT is E X A C T L Y what Blade Runner was meant to depict in a futuristic setting. It worked WELL, and it is sorely missed from the director's cut.
Honestly, and many will agree, unless you've seen the original cut of this film, you lose a LOT of information that helps you understand the story to the fullest. If I'm "whining" or "don't understand the `new school' " and you DISAGREE blindly, then don't you EVER use the CAST/CREW COMMENTARY feature on you DVDs again. Yeah...I THOUGHT so!!!
So-perhaps those with the "power" can do what many of us are asking: Give us our movie back...the way it was MEANT to be seen...the way WE remember it.
Rating:
Summary: Mindless action. Buy the book instead!
Review: This movie is good if you have nothing better to do than sit at home and watch TV. I read the book (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep) and loved it. I thought the video was 'dumbed-down' far to much and lost all origional meaning. Just sex and violence with no moral. Don't get me wrong, sex and violence is great entertainment, but it shouldn't be used to butcher a excellent novel. READ THE BOOK!!!
|
