Blade Runner - worth it?
 

I'm thinking of buying this film, cause I haven't seen it yet. I don't know anything about it, except that it's a legend. Any one seen it and can give me some sort of recommendation? (I could of course read on Amazon or something, but I'd rather ask you ;) )

I didn't enjoy the movie. The problem with "classics" is that they are so iconic that if you haven't seen them by now, you've still seen them 50 times already, done better and more convincing. This is because modern movies turn it into a formula and improve on it. I was bored at the pacing and underwhelmed by the concept.

I believe it's one of the better movies ever made, but I admit that not everyone is going to like it. Maybe read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (by Philip K. Dick), the novel upon which the movie is based first. If you like it, you'll probably like the movie.

I highly recommend it. We have the regular version & the directors cut on VHS, the directors cut on DVD (which was severely damaged by someone that I loaned it to), & the official soundtrack by Vangelis (not the orchestra one that was first released).

"All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."

i gave it a shot a few times.

i havnt finished it yet.

To answer your question: yes.
I disagree with Halx. Personally, I've yet to see a portrayal of the future that was as convincing, aside from
perhaps Firefly (the series for the movie Serenity).

It depends on what kind of movies you like.

It's definitely not a non-stop action movie.

It's basically a noir detective movie, set in a neo-industrialist future.

I would suggest the original version far a person's first viewing because it contains a voiceover track that basically lets you "hear" the main character's thought process.

I think alot of people that hold a special place for Blade Runner are those, like myself, who saw it the first time around.

So, if you are not jaded by the orgy of CG and explosions that makes up much of today's sci-fi movies, then I would highly recommend it.

Couldn't have said it better myself. The "classic" problem applies to BR really well.

I'm just not impressed by it.

I saw it first run, and haven't seen it since. I really enjoyed it, but I'm not into buying classics on DVD, unless they're before my time.

If you like bête noire, it's worth watching.

It's a good flick. Very atmospheric. Very Micky Spillane. I recommend it, and while Ahlx may be correct with respect to the iconic nature of the film, It is good to explore the roots of cinematic developments. You could argue that Star Wars began the de-splashification of the sci-fi genre making the technology of the alternative world very real and commonplace.

I saw it just after it first came out and thought it was fantastic. Of course, word of mouth at the time was not good so my expectations weren't high. I've grown to appreciate it more on repeat viewings.

I think some of it is lost on younger generations who don't see it in the same context... In other words, your experience of viewing it is tainted by what has come since.

I think it's one of the seminal science fiction movies of the 20th century, one of the first to display the future as dystopia rather than utopia: industrial, bleak, constantly raining, all living animals have died off and been replaced by robot animals. Watch the original version, with the voiceover to get the full effect and explain some of the "insider" information.

Ugh, no, do not watch the first version with the voiceover. Why would you want to do that and dispel all the mystery?

I first saw BladeRunner with my dad after we saw Escape From LA in the theaters together. He was unimpressed by it, and told me I should see a better version of future LA. So we rented BladeRunner. It was late, I was tired, I didn't get it. My dad was disappointed.

I came back to it a few years later though, and it really fell into place for me. Unlike Hal, I think one of the things that makes BladeRunner so good to me is seeing how much of an impact it has had on virtually every sci-fi movie that has come out since it came out. The vision there has tremendously shaped how the future on earth looks in media. Also, the movie has some wonderfully iconic moments. I honestly get shivers thinking about Rutger Hauer's monologue at the end, but that's just me.

About the only complaint I can think of about BladeRunner is how many goddamn versions there are out there, and how differently they portray, in particular, whether or not Deckward is a Replicant. I hate the voiceover version, myself, but the live happily ever after version kind of sucks, too. I haven't watched the new ultimate edition version, but I'm told it's the most authentic to the spirit of the book (the plots of the book and movie are only vaguely related).

Oh, god no...

I think Blade Runner is one of the few examples of a movie turning out better than the source material. It's so far removed from the book--as most Ridley Scott movies are, in my experience--that the relationship between the two is tangential at best.

Had I read the book first, I really don't think I would have ever picked up the movie, despite the strong Harrison Ford mojo.

As for the movie, there really isn't any more to say that hasn't already been said. that I'm going to eventually pick up for myself. At $25 what have you to lose?

DADoES (I'm lazy, sue me) is a great story, I think, but it's only tangentially related to BladeRunner. It's more an "inspired by" than a "based on" kind of situation. I'd read the story regardless of if you check out the movie, but that's just me. I think Philip K Dick is neato.

Asking other people's opinions is a little futile since they are only opinions.

What kind of movies do you like?

One of the most remarkable things about this movie is that the original was done in-the-camera. There is NO CGI. The matte painting is remarkable. It's actually more realistic "feeling" than a lot of modern CGI.

The pace is slow, the editing is ... atrocious, the dialog is sketchy (depending on the actor -- Rutger Hauer's impromptu lines are the best), the continuity is laughable. It's still an amazing movie despite it's numerous flaws; maybe the flaws are what make it so good. And considering the basic concept of the movie, that in itself is thought provoking.

If you watch and you like the movie, I HIGHLY recommend getting the latest version with the bonus disk. You can watch exactly how the movie was made from initial concept to final distribution. Did you know that they wanted Dustin Hoffman as the lead? They even made up storyboards based on Hoffman's physique. Of course, you may not be interested in the how's of movie making ...

I can't think of an example of a "classic" that was "done better and more convincing". However, I don't have a good definition of what a "classic" is.

I enjoyed Blade Runner, but I definitely would not rank it as one of the "better movies ever made". It's definitely worth a viewing. If you're looking for where movies like Bladerunner came from, I would watch some film noir (The Big Sleep, The Maltese Falcon, Double Indemnity, Out of the Past, etc.). I don't think that Bladerunner improved upon those "classics".

How about "it's one of the better SCI-FI movies ever made." I like it, but my parents did take me to it when I was ten. You know, everyone saw Star Wars and here is Han Solo in another sci fi movie. The future as being gritty and imperfect was a very different take on future society. It's not perfect, but I think it is worth watching if you are a sci fi fan.

i really liked blade runner when i first saw it---for some reason, it hasn't aged as i would have expected--i'm not sure why that is, but i equate it with the horn patches that steely dan arrangements feature in many many songs, which once sounded kinda cool and now sound cheesy. i don't know why there'd be a world-historical shift in relation to dx-7 patches, but there is one.

the sets are astonishing.

i do think it's been talked to death in some sectors--if you haven't been subjected to that, then i would definitely recommend watching it.


btw--i think the best sci-fi film is tarkovsky's solaris. that remains stunning. the sets are fabulous--cheesy mosfilm work, but done in a really inventive way.
then there's the driving sequence, which i still think is the finest single merging of visuals and sound i've seen so far.

The challenge with watching older films is the same as reading older literature. One has to consider the time period in which something was created and appreciate it from that point and see how it laid foundation for the creation of the new items.

For example Godfather cannot be interesting in comparison to the whole genre it spawned, but one can see the how it influenced things to come.

One can also just watch a film with a particular idea in mind, such as looking at some of the effects and see how they were done in comparison to today's CGI methods.

A year ago or so, I rented it and was happy with that decision. Although I didn't buy it and would give it a 2 out of 4 stars. I mean Harrison Ford was good in it. And It wasn't just the CGI and advances in tech that could have made it better. They needed to work on the story line and make it a little more interesting. I think Logan's Run was the better Sci Fi movie that made you think more.

Both movies would be better if they remade them today, but added a few different twists.

I'm up there with those that feel this is one of the most important sci-fi movies of all time. I've seen the movie a bunch of times and I appreciated the theatrical version when I first saw it, and years later appreciated the directors cut even more. I've seen this a couple times in the theater, oddly enough only the directors cut on the big screen as I was 7 when the movie was released. I've also bought this 4 times, vhs, 2 different dvd release and finally on blu-ray.

If you have a reasonable interest in sci-fi, see the theatrical release. If you like film noir, see the directors cut. Not into either I would probably skip the movie.

As a note for the OP (or anybody else that is interested), for those that have the Big Lots stores in your area, they have a bunch of older movies on DVD for $3, among which was the Blade Runner : Directors cut. You can't go wrong for 3 bucks.

Thanks for all your replies. I think I'll try to find a rental copy of it first or a cheap one in store - or maybe I'll just download it off the net.

Just that so many has had something to say about it has gotten me all psyched up. ;)

One of the best movies ever made in my humble opinion.

I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned one of the central themes of the movie - the desire for life.

You see, the Replicants as they were designed and manufactured only had a 3 year lifespan. Not much by human standards, but these Replicants weren't human were they? They were disposable people, manufactured beings. We (humanity) are so superior to them we can do with them as we please right? (Sound familiar? We humans have been doing it to each other since the beginning of time.)

Ah, but there's the catch.

Are we so superior to them?

What was their crime? Simply wanting to live? (Something we humans usually take for granted.) Is that a crime worthy of death sentence? - the desire to simply live.

If you've watched the film, you know that the Replicants aren't supposed to have emotions like we do. They've been deliberately manufactured to die after a 3 year life span (humans playing God again) But surprise, they do. They see humans behaving a certain way and they try to emulate us, yet they are awkward at it. But the emotions ARE there. (Eg. the scene where Roy comes back to the J.S. Sebastien's apartment and meets Pris and he kisses her, but he really doesn't know what he's doing, and neither does she, but he kisses her none the less.)

The scene where Deckard chases and kills (in a very cold way, without feeling, without remorse) Zhora in slo-motion - her desire to live is heart breaking to watch. What is her crime? Her simple desire for life? Yet she is sentenced to death and Deckard is the instrument of that death. He kills her, yet he (a human) doesn't give it a second thought. She's not human.

As an aside, yes, I think it important that Deckard is human and not a replicant. He is part of what's fucked up with the human race. There has been discussion (by Scott himself in fact) that Deckard was a replicant. Ford, however, was adament that Deckard be human because audiences need to be able to relate to Deckard. I would agree with Ford, but not for the reasons of necessarily relating to Deckard (since Deckard is really an antihero to me), but to the idea Deckard is flawed, though not so flawed that there ins't hope for him and by default, hope for humanity.

The final scene in which Roy and Deckard go mano a mano is the most fascinating to wach. Here is this Replicant - Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer in his Aryan PRIME) a "combat model" chasing Deckard and conversely being chased by Deckard through this nightime urban industrial building in the never ending rain. Roy has Deckard beat after a long chase. Deckard is trying to KILL Roy, but Roy is more than capable of out thinking and out performing and then killing Deckard. Deckard has lost. In the end of the scene Deckard is hanging by one arm from the precipice of the roottop (now who wants to live? Can you now relate?) and we see Roy walk up to him and look down at him. It's over for Deckard. If the roles were reversed Deckard would have simply stomped on Roy's fingers. But wait, what does Roy do? He pulls Deckard up and saves him just as Deckard was going to fall to his death. Roy (the manufactured being, the sub human, the piece of property that was to be shot on sight) demonstrates the superior trait of mercy. (Something that has never even crossed Deckard's mind.) The scene ends with the two combatants looking at each other and Roy uttering the famous line "time to die" and with that, everything that Roy has ever known in his brief life is lost forever "like tear drops in the rain".

The shot ends with Deckard looking truly humbled yet that moment is not lost on Deckard. There is perhaps hope after all. Salvation.

ok, can you list just 25 films, thematically similar that are better ?

honestly I know there are moments (like the voice over bits) that aren't so great but overall this is a great film. imho.

is it really a "classic" is it that old ? I think of classic as maybe 60's and older. this was...late 70's ? or early 80's ?

I remember walking out of the theater and it was night time and raining. it was like I walked out of the film and right into it.

I rate it as a must see.

I couldn't make it past the 30 minute mark. It was so mind numbingly boring. Gave it a chance twice.

Only other two movies I had to quit watching were I <3 Huckabees and 2001: A Space Odyssey.

rent it first, and if you like it, buy it. i own it. saw it in theaters and didnt much care for it, but saw it again and loved it. i dont like the director´s cut though, i prefer the narration.

I agree with all James t kirk had to say, its such a beautiful, fascinating movie.
I think it all depends on your perspective before watching though, and how much you know.
I knew little when I first watched it two years ago in my science fiction and fantasy course. It was tough to follow on that tiny tv with 30-40 kids trying to watch, and distracting noise. But even after that, I thought it was cool.
I continued my research on the story after, and found it to be more and more interesting with each bit of info I could grab. By the end of that course I had to write a paper on it. Really immersing myself in the story helped.
They came out with the collector's edition recently, which I had to get. :D All three versions and a bonus disc.
It really is one of the best films ever made. I think people expect too much from their movies now...all flash and show, no mystery or depth.

It's well worth it, I think. There's no getting round the fact that it was one of the central films in science fiction cinema, and if nothing else, some of the shots, designs, and thematic techniques have become absolutely iconic.

I like the film very much, and I think that it is one of the few science fiction films that have really retained their character as pieces of cinematic art, rather than just amusing entertainment.

That said, it is flawed. The script, editing, and photography are not in harmony with each other, and the situation has not been helped by the studio releasing a multitude of different cuts. I recommend the director's cut: I think it felt the cleanest and most coherent to me.

It's worth seeing the film, despite its flaws, just to see the entirety of the piece of art, and just to be able to recognize its influences when they pop up in other films.

Totally agree about Solaris and the car sequence.

Having marched through late 1980s-1990s academia, i definitely don't want to hear another word about Blade Runner or Merry Xmas Mr. Lawrence. Ugh. There are two arguments for cellulose nitrate film stock, i tell you!

What Horselover Fat had over his cinematic "interpreters" was a sense of humour. And that Harrison Furd is neither seen nor heard in the books.

Blade Runner had me from the first 2 or 3 seconds and kept me all the way until the end. Here's a taste:

25 better noir/sf films?

Solaris
Metropolis
Face of another
Cape Fear
A touch of evil
The big Schlaf
The 3rd man
Maltese falcon
White heat
Murder, my sweet
Farewell my lovely
Der Amerikanische Freund
Chinatown
Double indemnity
Osessione
High Sierra
Wages of fear
Ascenseur pour l'échafaud
Tirez sur le pianiste
Plein soleil
Stray dogs
Drunken angel
The bad sleep well
Tokyo drifter
The thin line aka Stranger within a woman

The third Fast and Furious movie?!

/kidding

Blade Runner in Blue-Ray is spectacular from a visual standpoint.
I love the hell out of the movie personally, but I saw it when I was but a wee lad...it is part of my childhood :)

i just rewatched this film and really want to get the Blu-Ray. I have the Director's Cut DVD which is arguably the worst DVD transfer ever (it looks like someone rented the VHS and burned it to a DVD, no joke).

While "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" is a great novel, i'd say there is maybe a 10-15% similarity between the novel and the movie. Basic concept is the same, but nearly all the details are different.

All that said, I think the movie is great and highly recommend it.

The only movie I've seen on that list is Metropolis, and yes, it is fantastic. :) So creative! I would have never heard of it if it weren't for the sci fi and fantasy course I took.

The imagery of the Blade Runner universe is the foremost in my mind of any I've seen. The environment is so rich, its not flashy or corny. The movie doesn't even use a lot of back story or dialogue, because, at least how I see it, what it portrays is basic human circumstance. The replicants think they can pass the Voight-Kampff test even if they know they are not human. The characters do not have malice towards each other, yet they are drawn together, out of a more internal struggle. When you watch the movie, think if any of the characters act by choice or simply out of circumstance.

There is also a Blade Runner adventure game by WestWood that immerses you deeper into its realistic atmosphere.

I adore Blade Runner- I've seen it countless times on cable, twice in the theater, numerous times on laserdisc and I own the boxed set of all five versions on DVD. I own an assortment of souvenirs from the film, such as a replica tie that Harrison Ford wore in the movie, and two distinct soundtracks (neither of which is that horrible orchestral version) and even one of those "lit-handle" unmbrellas the extras carried around outside.

I admit that it is not as strong as it could be, with Ridley Scott spending far more time on the "look" instead of directing the actors. For those interested, I highly recommend Paul M. Sammon's "Future Noir: The Making of Blade Runner", where it seems the original concepts in the script somehow got away from the filmmakers.

Nevertheless, I'm still hooked on the movie. If there's ever a time when throwing in one of the DVDs still won't get me my fix, my backup plan is to unravel the origami unicorn that came with the boxed set into a thin tube, take one of the more useless editions of the film (the outdated Director's Cut, for example) grind the disc up into a fine powder and then snort it.

^this. except i would never undo the unicorn... MMG, next step is to learn the gutter language and then you can be almost as fanatic as skinny white people who wear green tights and get plastic surgery for their ears to look like legolas