One of the worst and most hyped films I've ever seen. I absolutely don't get what this flick wants to tell me.
Besides that, it is neither thrilling nor entertaining, so I can only hope that there is a message and deeper meaning to it that I just don't get... However, I would recommend to stay away from it if you expect a SciFi thriller because I know for sure that Blade Runner is not thrilling at all.
Blade Runner is one of the more gaping holes in the list of films I haven’t seen (or at least, don’t remember well enough to talk about). Yesterday’s viewing of The Martian got me thinking about Ridley Scott’s past work so here I am.
I really should have done this sooner.
L.A. 2019, Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) is a ‘Blade Runner’ - a policeman whose sole purpose is to hunt and kill replicants; machines almost indistinguishable from humans, yet banned from Earth. Four have been detected on the planet so he is called up to hunt and kill them.
Scott’s dystopian LA draws you in and holds you captive for 2 hours. This is a masterfully shot, timeless, beautiful piece of work. Every single frame is a work of art. The visual effects are not only highly effective, but incredibly creative and unique; never has anything like this been made before or since.
The plot is simple, one man chases another. However it’s driven almost entirely by its central themes; what is it to be human? Who deserves to live or die? Are we responsible for the things we create? What happens when our creations surpass us? All of these questions go unanswered, yet Scott somehow revels in the ambiguity.
Decker is a blank canvas of a character. The replicants he is chasing are complex, unique individuals. It’s no accident that Rutger Hauer plays the most human character in the film. His is the stand-out performance here, if only for the closing monologue.
Still fresh & still relevant, Blade Runner is indeed a modern masterpiece.
After all these years, i finally take time to see that movie... Boring till the end :-(
I finally decided to watch this after 30 years of hearing what a "triumph of atmospheric invention" and "masterpiece or noir sci-fi" it is.
To be honest, I'm really not impressed. It is so dull. I suspect I will have forgotten this film by late next week. It is what I'd consider to be "hangover fare" — a film you might half-watch from the couch because you have a raging headache and a diminished attention span.
But, to be fair, it's probably my fault that this movie fails to impress. I waited too long. It turns out there are some very real benefits to having watched 'Blade Runner' when it first came out.
It is likely that audiences back in 1982 would have been:
Most importantly, someone watching this film in 1982 might have been less sensitive to Rutger Hauer's excruciating mugging and overacting. This guy gets so much geek cred for his (admittedly gripping) "tears in rain" speech, but the rest of his performance is just over-the-top bonkers. And what the hell is Daryl Hannah trying to do? Angry Cirque du Soleil? Jeepers. I've seen scenery being chewed before, but I've never seen it chewed with a side order of inexplicable howling like a dog (Hauer) and ineffective violence gymnastics (Hannah).
'Blade Runner'. A 'triumph' and 'masterpiece' in 1982. Boring and cringeworthy in 2016.
"It's too bad she won't live! But then again, who does?"
Do any of us really live? Does it really matter in the end? All that matters is what we leave behind because most of our memories are lost like tears in the rain.
I can't wait for 2049. Denis Villeneuve has been one of the best directors of the past decade and I have complete faith he will make another masterpiece.
As excited to rewatch this the night before the sequel drops as I am the sequel itself...this sci-fi Gold is a small piece of my childhood...and besides...my ol'lady loves this movie too which means I get to throw a couple C beams across her Tannhauser gate after haaaaa
One of the earlier film that started cyberpunk genre in Hollywood cinemas. Considering the time it is made, the panorama of cyberpunk L.A. is impressive - it doesn't look old/fake, and you can see the way it influences the depiction of "high tech, low life" setting in later years, with tall and dark skyscrapers looming over the meagers' life of its citizens, police almost omnipresence appearing instantly as if they had eyes everywhere in the city. In the same time it is also indeed a film of its age: with ceiling fans, analogue devices, and low-res screens contrasting with its futuristic setting. Still, it is understandable how the atmosphere alone can leave a remarkable footprint on modern cinema.
However, the movie suffers from a terrible pacing. It is inconsistently slow, with ups and downs in a very sharp turns. There are moments you wished the movie can explore more, especially on exploring the fantastic atmosphere and the existential crisis of the Replicants. Meanwhile, there are other moments that you wished could've been cut short. For being a neo-noir thriller the movie hits the spot in maintaining its dark, mysterious atmosphere, but misses a lot in keeping the thrill high.
The final confrontation especially leaves a lot to be desired - as Deckard (the main character) just ran mindlessly, or, borrowing Roy's (the antagonist) line, just "being irrational", until the climax of the film. Which, again, leaves a gaping hole. The movie presents us the existential problem, the supposedly main theme of the movie, right there at Roy's dialogue. But minutes later after the monumental speech, the credits already rolled.
It's still a cult classic though. The setting was great. Worthy to be watched at least once.
Like others here, I'm late to the Blade Runner party. Except, I've tried to watch this movie 2-4 times in the past, and couldn't get past the first hour or so. Tonight, I resolved to watch the film in its entirety.
The beginning is pretty good. It's an over-the-top cyberpunk film, and as a gamer, I can see where Deus Ex, and to a lesser extent Fallout got some of their inspiration. Then it becomes a Rutger Hauer thriller. Which isn't a bad thing, it's a staple of 1980s film, but I don't think it lives up to the hype.
It's probably something that was better in its time that hasn't aged well. It might be time to remake this one, to bring a fresher perspective to the story.
A true science fiction story or film is about ideas, not spaceship battles, futuristic gadgets, or weird creatures. "Blade Runner" fully qualifies as this in its examination of the impact of technology on human society, existence, and the very nature of humanity itself. These themes are set in a fairly basic detective story that moves slowly but gradually builds power as the viewer is immersed in a dystopian futuristic Los Angeles.
Harrison Ford fans accustomed to the normally dynamic roles that he plays may be dissatisfied with the seemingly lifeless lead character that he portrays here as the replicant-hunting detective known as a "blade runner". They should be, for this dissatisfaction is part of the film experience, part of the dehumanized existence in the story's setting. However, as the story unfolds, we see Ford's character, Rick Deckard, slowly come alive again and recover some humanity while pursing four escaped replicants.
The replicants, genetically-engineered human cyborgs, that Deckard must hunt down and kill are in many ways more alive than Deckard himself initially. Their escape from an off-world colony has an explicit self-directed purpose, whereas Deckard's life appears to have none other than his job, one that he has tried to give up. By some standards, Deckard and the replicants have thin character development. However, this is a deeply thematic and philosophical film, and as such the characters are the tools of the story's themes. Each character reflects some aspect of humanity or human existence, but they lack others, for each is broken in ways that reflect the broken society in which they live and were conceived/created.
There are several dramatic moments involving life-and-death struggles, but most of these are more subdued than in a normal detective story plot. The film's power is chiefly derived through its stunning visual imagery of a dark futuristic cityscape and its philosophical themes.
Among the themes explored are the following: - The dehumanization of people through a society shaped by technological and capitalistic excess. - The roles of creator and creation, their mutual enslavement, and their role reversal, i.e., the creation's triumph over its creator. - The nature of humanity itself: emotions, memory, purpose, desire, cruelty, technological mastery of environment and universe, mortality, death, and more. - Personal identity and self-awareness. - The meaning of existence.
This is truly one of the greatest science fiction films ever made, one that requires a thinking viewer in order to understand and appreciate it.
Watched this for the first time in the 80s. Didn't really get the meaning. What the heck, I was probably 14 years old. Watched it again sometime in the past. Understood it but still not impressed. I think it´s a tad overdone. It is that one scene that everyone praises that defines this movie. Those couple of line of dialogue at the end. The rest is a rather boring story about a guy hunting down those replicants and then (how original) falling in love with one. Soundtrack is great, though.Now I watched it again in preparation for 2049 and I am seriously considering not to watch it.
simple detective story in an amazing and detailed future world, with Harrison at his coolest
Considering there are 66 people watching "Blade Runner" on the opening weekend of "Blade Runner 2049", and only 14 people marked as watching the new film. I wonder how many people have checked in to the wrong film on this site.
For those that find it boring, yes it's a slower pace of storytelling, there aren't fifty cuts in a ten second action sequence. The story is a journey and one that is meant to be savored, right from the beginning of Vangelis' music to Roy Batty's death and the origami unicorn, it's a discovery.
This is a breakdown that is worth reading. http://dramatica.com/analysis/blade-runner
A masterpiece! First I gave it a 9 out of 10 rating just out of pure enjoyment of the world and characters portayed in this film, but then it made me think, like all my other "10 out of 10"s. I realised what an even greater artpiece this is! (Btw I have only watched the Directors cut. I have heard of all the different versions of this movie, but i don't know the story behind this, I just know mine ended with a origami unicorn ;-) )
Image and sound 4.75 / 5. To see this masterpiece is a delight, to see it in Cinema Paco is the milk, as seen and heard. We saw the last version, no voice-over, different ending and unicorn scene
It's very rare, but the movie is better than the book in my opinion. Sure it doesn't talk about the religious aspects and doesn't lasts long on the animals' rarity and its social impact. But still, the atmosphere, the image, the characters, are all great and supported by an excellent OST. One of the few Ridley Scott's real masterpieces.
what a graphic to be seen.enough to have their own trademark.
My favorite SF movie, I've watched it so many times.
"I don't know why he saved my life. Maybe in those last moments he loved life more than he ever had before. Not just his life - anybody's life; my life. All he'd wanted were the same answers the rest of us want. Where did I come from? Where am I going? How long have I got? All I could do was sit there and watch him die."
Great every time I watch it!
A moody and atmospheric masterpiece. The ambiguity of it all is what elevates it even further. Classic sci-fi.
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears...in...rain. Time to die."
One of my all time favourite scenes from any movie ever. I've watched the "Tears in Rain" monologue about a billion times by now. It's a scene where Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) leans humanity from someone who isn't human.
Rutger Hauer, I love you man.
Whatever you're imagining this movie is going to be like, it's going to be different:It's like hearing car based action movie and you're expecting Fast and Furious and are getting Mad Max Fury Road. Or space exploration expecting Star Trek (series) and getting Interstellar. War movie expecting Saving Private Ryan and getting Dunkirk. Or tragic romance expecting Titanic and getting Her.So whatever you're expecting to see when you think about cult classic sci fi thriller: Blade Runner is going to be different.
Great dystopian future with steampunk themes with great messages, dialogue and line delivery
I've been reading a lot of lists including this movie as one of the greatest of all time, and I have no idea why. Visually it is absolutely amazing, Ridley Scott's direction is amazing and it is incredibly stylish. The score is perfect for the movie as well. Harrison Ford's performance was just not good, I have no idea how no one criticizes just how incredibly wooden he was. The entire movie I was expecting him to say "Hey guess what I'm a robot, that's why I've been acting like an exhausted teenager this whole time".
I watched the movie without the director's cut and it included his awful narration. That was a big mistake, Ford sounds like he got called in to the studio on his vacation and just wants to get it over with. Ford isn't the only issue though, the main idea is kind of creative but the execution is just confusing. I have no idea what leads Ford's character from one clue to the next, and his jumps are incredibly convenient. The story itself just seems like a glorified twilight zone episode. It's not a bad movie, but it just seems so basic. ultimately I give it 5/10, If you look at style alone it is a masterpiece, and I can see just how influential it is, but the pacing is far to slow and the plot seems to basic for it to be much more than a stylish bag of tricks with nothing else.
Roy Batty is a genius!! (Ridley Scott too, of course...)
Can somebody explain to me why is this movie so famous. ??? I'm a true scifi lover and i have red the book that inspired the movie. So I believe I understand the story clearly enough. And still I could not say that i liked it. It is slow and overly dramatic with a dull ending. Am i right? or am I missing something?
One of my all time fav.
«I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate.All those moments will be lost in time like tears in the rain...»
Bladerunner, ficção e ação na medida certa, quem nao assistiu precisa ver, vale pipoca e refri e a familia toda.
I FILM DI FANTASCIENZA CHE HANNO SEGNATO L'IMMAGINARIO COLLETTIVO"Io ne ho viste cose che voi umani non potreste immaginarvi". Dopo il capolavoro che Scott ha tratto da Philip K. Dick, la pioggia incessante e la musica di Vangelis sono diventate sinonimo di futuro.
Um filme que mudou a história do cinema e é “obrigatório” para quem gosta de cyberpunk. Pena que existam tantas versões do filme e a que eu vi não é tão maravilhosa assim (vi a que tem narrações que explicam o filme, desnecessário).
As a whole movie, it is quite disappointing and boring to watch here in 2018, but the visuals and the world is really cool and masterpiece .... Especially when the creator asked the same questions we started to ask again nowadays, what is creation, and what if our creations surpass us... Genius! And timeless!
Looks amazing. The dialogue delivery is mellow and together with the atmosphere it puts you in a slight a trance, which can make you miss things. I think this is why some get bored.I dont don't see why people can't see a messsage in the movie. The replicants are basically a class of slaves, and the escaped ones wants to stop more being made to cease an existance they see as empty and cruel. Is it cruel to give human feelings to a replicant? They're just a company robot after all. The human design has consequences, but who cares? It's the basic morality twist of who is right and who is wrong. Then how does the blade runner character fit into all of this. I watched the final cut. I liked the ending. You're even left like the characters at the end questioning what's important in life.So it's a commentary on technology and human society. In the end you can draw simularities on human exploitation and class systems, especially concerning corporations and business which is probably why big billboards appear throughout the movie. In the end its a sad movie. It's a slow movie but luckily its very escapist in atmosphere when viewing. If you come into this movie expecting a robot action movie you'll be disappointed.
In view of looking at Blade Runner 2049, he finally decided to watch the original version (shame on me for not having done it). From the great Ridley Scott. The level design is superb, the music beautiful. Two hours of incredible cinema.
Hoping that the new version is of the same caliber.
Not as good as people says, but it's a cool movie to watch when have nothing to do.
This felt like the Avatar of its time. Impressive visuals, but just painfully boring and slow to watch. Pretty overrated, but I think most of its legacy is its influence on better 80s movies.
A very moody film, with an intriguing story.Fantastic visual direction.Sometimes some stiff acting.
I saw Blade Runner a couple of years ago, but I forgot most of the parts, so it was time to rewatch this. I feel very ambivalent, because although it has so much value, I could notice its flaws as well. I think many people don't connect with Blade Runner, because it's visually a nightmare, not as spectacular as blockbusters nowadays and considered as boring. In my opinion, it carries its quality inside. However, the fact that it's always raining and the sun's never shining could be a sign of a depressed or woeful point of view that the future will be depraved and full of sins. Furthermore, I don't feel Rick Decard has been in the centre of the story, although everyone - who is not familiar with Blade Runner - identifies the film with him or at least with Harrison Ford. I couldn't get to know him better during its runtime, simply becuase it didn't show me a single detail about him besides his profession and task. I rather could emphatize with the enemy (according to the film), a gang of Nexus 6 replicants, who start a rebellion because of their role of the society and suppression. That fascinates me the most, the Nexus 6 replicants become self-aware, and realize they have a life, which is more controlled than humans', because their life is exactly estimated, they are living for the same amount of time nothing more, nothing less. This brings up questions. How come don't the older versions know who they are, just the new Nexus 6s? Why would Tyrell Company make much more developed versions if they wanted to utilize them as slaves? Certainly, they don't feel it right, and the rebellious gang's leader Roy Betty is the one, who wants to be equivalent to humans. So I think his death - although it's not shown onscreen - the nail in his palm and the white pigeon refer to he is a similar kind of figure to replicants as Jesus was to the mankind.If this dark distopy could become reality it would mean the end of mankind. Hopefully Philip K. Dick's fiction won't come true neither in 2019, when the events take place, nor ever.
I know it is a classic, but nowadays, it has not really the same impact that at the time. And the visual is really outdated.. I wish I will have see it Day one ! At least I have seen it and I will be ready for Blade Runner 2049 :)
The only good thing of this flick is the clear influence it had in Westword.
@dylankuipers guess i misclicked. Thanks
I like the first 50 minutes until the whacky shit takes over, then it even falls into the trash category. Harrison Ford's voice over is terrible. The script is good and some parts are pretty advanced for its time but overall I didn't like Blade Runner very much
Very symbolic but totally totally weird.