Blade Runner [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: Best Science Fiction Movie Ever Made
Review: "Blade Runner" relies on two tremendous driving forces. The heralded visuals which have been imitated countlessly over the years, not just in science fiction, but music video, thrillers and commercials. While Blade Runner itself borrows a few elements from Fritz Lang's "Metropolis", it distances itself from the great German piece with a realism that is uncharacteristically grounded (pun intended) for science fiction.

The startling thing about Blade Runner is that every year that passes by, Los Angeles bears a closer resemblance to this skin grafting, smog congested, racist society that was projected by novelist Philip K. Dick, director Ridley Scott, visualist Syd Mead and screenwriters Hampton Fancher and David Peoples. Organ and tissue implants are better known today as plastic surgery. LA is a town in which such an emphasis is placed on physical appearance. Inevitably, clones created from a superior genetic stock would arise in a society such as this.

The Director's Cut gives the smoky and towering visuals more breathing room and the subtleties of Ridley Scott's detail come to light. The central conflict and irony of this film is that you have a sardonic Humphrey Bogart disenchanted Blade Runner commissioned to seek and retire all androids, regardless of their own personal involvement in a crime that was committed Off-World. This forces the androids to kill in order not to be killed.

Just who is the true protaganist of this film? Deckard is just doing his job, and is, for the most part, a static character. One moment largely affected by the additional unicorn scene is when he finds the origami unicorn on the floor. This is one of the few intuitive moments where Deckard reflects on the human nature of his own being. The unicorn is a dream that Deckard imagines, and dreams are our own to treasure and fear. The origami folding Gaff places the very mythical creature in his dreams. He dissects Deckard's mind much in the same manner that Deckard smashes Rachael's precious childhood memories.

I could go on much longer, but for the sake of this recommendation, I hope the complexity of this story speaks for itself. It is emotional in a deep sense and the visuals are stunning for its time. Many of the model techniques and wire effects outdo its contemporary rivals who utilize digital effects. They are close to 20 years old, and still drop jaws all across the world.

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: One Of The Top Five Greatest Science Fiction Films
Review: "Blade Runner" is a hauntingly beautiful sci-fi film. I first saw the film on the Sci-Fi Channel about a month ago, and was so compelled by it, I bought the video. Harrison Ford is terrific as Rick Deckard, an ex-blade runner assigned to kill four rogue replicants. Replicants are artificial humans that were created by the Tyrell Corporation. When a bloody mutiny happened in the Off-world colonies, replicants were declared illegal on Earth, under penalty of death. Special police units, called blade runners, were assigned to kill any tresspassing replicant. This was not called execution, it was called retirement. Rutger Haur's performence as Roy Batty (the leader of the rogue replicants) sent shivers down my spine ("4! 5!, How To Stay Alive!). All in all, SEE THIS MOVIE RIGHT NOW!!!

Rating:
Summary: Trust the original vission
Review: "Blade Runner" is a story of redemption and hope, in a movie about what it takes to be "human".

Rick Deckard (Ford) is a retired cop. A "Blade Runner" who hunts down replicants who make it to earth, where they are not legal, and kills them. He is blackmailed into taking another job, to "air out" 4 Nexus-6 replicants who have hijacked a shuttle and taken it to earth.

If this movie has a downside, it might just be that it was far to subtle for "joe sports fan" moviegoers. A look at the reviews here on Amazon would seem to uphold this opinion. The ending of the director's cut IS a happy ending. It is amazing how many people who liked the movie don't get that fact.

Another subtle clue to what is really going on, (possibly a spoiler, but probably not noticed by most of those who have seen it) is that replicant's eyes glow red in some scenes. The first one is the owl at the Tyrel corporation. And this comes through much better on the DVD director's cut as well.

On Amazon's "Do you like it" scale I give this 5 stars, because it is one of my favorites. On the "how good a movie is it" scale, I give it 4, because it could have been better.

Rating:
Summary: Beware of "Director's Cut" changes
Review: "Blade Runner" is one of my favorite movies. I have owned it in every format, and when the "Director's Cut" DVD became available, I bought it immediately and sold my Embassy LD of the original theatrical release: I should ahve watched the DVD first. Several of Deckard's speeches have been deleted, most notably the one that he makes after the death of Roy Baddy. In addition, the end sequence, in which Deckard and Rachel are flying "North" has been removed. If this is the way Ridley Scott really wanted the movie to be, he was wrong.

Rating:
Summary: A thinking man's movie
Review: "Blade Runner" is, in my mind, one of the most underrated masterpieces of all time. The movie takes place in the early part of the 21st century. Harrison Ford plays a cop whose job it is to track down illegal artificial life forms called "replicants." So, sounds like just another action / beat-em up / shoot-em up, right? Wrong.

This movie is not an action movie. It is, if anything, a drama. It deals with the 20th century postmodern condition and has many philosophical implications. For one, it deals with the rights of artificial life forms and what, exactly (if anything?) distinguishes them from us; something that is not far fetched at all considering the horrifying technology we are right on the brink of having in regards to microbiology and gene manipulation.

The sets are lavish & have a haunting, gothic feel to them. The acting, with Harrison Ford in the lead, is top notch. This is one of the few movies where I can say that Sean Young turned in a credible performance. Also, the soundtrack is by Vangelis; it is subtle....stirring....perfect for this movie.

This is a movie I would highly recommend to ANYONE who lives in this day & age of scientific marvels & their potential hideous consequences. Even if you don't like science fiction, per-se, this movie is worth watching at least once.

Rating:
Summary: Repeating what someone else said
Review: "If you have a brain and you can use it, you'll prefer the director's cut than the old one"

The most sensible words I've seen from the personal reviews so far.

If you want to see a "nice happy ending" go watch a "nice safe Harrison Ford movie" like Patriot Games & or some other tosh like it.

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: Too smart to succeed, too cult to fail
Review: 'Blade Runner' is really a phenomenon in the sense that never before has a would-be screen Leviathan bombed so badly, so quickly upon release. There's so much awe with which to hold this movie that that awe has itself become sickeningly cliched over the years, as if the ranks of 'B.R.' admirers have swelled beyond the intelligentsia clique that was there in the beginning. But, to be fair, the mystique that has formed such a powerful undercurrent over the years does indeed exist. Firstly, the casting is as flawless as the academic merits of the story. Director Scott, still fresh from his 'Alien' phase, handled himself well in the driving seat, pulling class A+ results from a heavily invested-in set. The violence is sufficient for the film and the pacing worked just fine. So what went wrong after all that? The answer could well lie in the novel feel behind 'Blade Runner'. It's not sci-fi per se but, rather, is a shaky hybrid of Forties Film Noir and a new type of Science Fiction which had really only been seen before in the likes of 'Outland'. 1981 and 82 audiences weren't ready to receive this marriage of styles - the counterfeit glory of the 'Star Wars' saga had poisoned far, far too many minds for a break with formulaic convention to be welcomed. Also, the picture was derived from the short story 'Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?' which proved that it had an immediate grounding in a thinking man's world. Unfortunately, Thinking men's films do not sell well when put alongside Hollywood sugar-coats. The masses are just too vain, surface-oriented and gluttonous to want to strain their brains too far and there were far too many cerebral elements in 'Blade Runner' to pass this acid test. The heavy leanings toward symbolism are alone proof of this (your average everday moron just can't accommodate stuff like this in his own mind). It goes to show that a good idea and a good film transcription of that are far from being enough to make the end result sell well. What makes 'Blade Runner' a classic is simply that it has been a solid catalogue seller on video over the years. Thanks in particular to the 1992 tenth anniversary re-release, Ridley Scott's gem seems to have been well and truly granted a posthumous type of respect, almost born of guilt from those who had lacked the mental stamina to take it in '82. Last point: Vangelis's soundtrack (the 1994 CD release) is otherworldly to hear. It is but one more piece of evidence to demonstrate that the film was an expensive gamble that failed initially (through no fault of its own) but then bounced back because its redeeming features were too numerous and fundamental to let it be defeated. This is an anti space soap-opera and therefore the perfect antidote to all this neo 'Star Wars' and 'Star Trek' hype. It is also Ridley Scott at his peak. 'Blade Runner' stands to this day in a category all of its own - a one-off curiosity - the oddity blockbuster with a small 'b' which is loved by many, more because many of them think it's cool to love an underdog rather than because the vast majority want to discuss the work's actual content. Nobody wants to be seen to hate it.