User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 385 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 13 out of 385

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 12, 2011
    When I first watched this movie, I didn't really pay attention. Which isn't the films fault, given it is a film based highly on the narrative, themes and relationships within the film. Which is respectively hard to follow for an incredibly tired and not so-sober individual. It wasn't until a year or so later, I saw the film was on tv and decided to watch it again. Given I hardly remembered what even happened in it. Let's just say after paying attention to the detail in this film, I was blown-back by it's style and atmosphere. Scott did very well in creating a realistic and believable gritty future; while also being able to capture how such a world alienates and disillusions it's residents. It's a beautiful social commentary and deals with many philosophical ideas, while never telling you any definite answers to them. It's definitely one of the best narrative uses of a sci-fi setting, and deserves all of its recognition and praise. Expand
  2. Dec 26, 2011
    You see, I'm not a cult follower of Ridley Scott's "Blade Runner", so I have no **** clue of what you zealots see out there. However, what I see is a movie filled with rich, wonderful visuals accompanied by a very, very weak story (but the ending was good).
  3. Nov 5, 2010
    This is probably one of my favorite movies of all time and I think it will continue to be for as long as I'm around. The world that Scott created in this film reeks of depth, style, and an ambiance that many films can only struggle to grasp, which to me is very impressive considering that this was done before the special effects revolution of the 90's and 2000's. The story revolves around a retired blade-runner; a cop that specializes in hunting rogue replicants (synthetic humans), named Deckard (Harrison Ford), who is brought out of retirement to hunt down a group of replicants who have arrived on Earth. The movie does an excellent job of casting the characters of the movie in many shades of grey, with no one character being truly good or evil, and also poses some interesting questions as to the nature of humanity and what defines us. The films visuals are inspired; the term "film noir" is very fitting for it, but may seem slower paced to those used to more modern "action" films with their rapid fire cuts. Where many films seem to have action just for the sake of it (cough, Michael cough Bay, cough), Scott's action scenes have more of a purpose to further the narrative. It takes some getting used to, but the slower pace fits the concept better, and only adds more to the feeling of loss, stagnation, and oppression of living in that future society. The music is very ambient, with a synth sound to it, and although I don't usually like that kind of thing, it does compliment the film well and adds to the overall mood. Ford, Olmos (who only has a small role, but somehow makes the most of it), Hauer, Young, and Hannah all give strong performances, and although most of them play their roles somewhat subdued (which fits the future world they live in well), it's ironic (and most likely on purpose) that the most passionate and human-like of all the characters are the replicants themselves. It's an interesting notion that the humans are portrayed as much more cynical and full of despondency, while the shorter life-spanned replicants seem to embody a passion for life that they seem to have lost. This movie is deep, but not for everyone. People who have short attention spans or no interest in entertaining ideas about humanity and our future should probably stay away. Those who love a story about a man struggling to find his humanity in the desolate landscape of the future, cool visuals, or just sci-fi in general owe it to themselves to see the movie that influenced countless movies, TV series, books, music, and video games, and will continue to do so for a long time. Expand
  4. Jul 24, 2011
    this film has great lighting in it. great set design if it was just for looking at a set. its the first attempt to mix film noir with sci fi creating the space noir genre. thats it. THIS IS THE MOST OVER RATED FILM IN THE HISTORY OF FILM. In fact, this film is a perfect failure on almost every level. The basic problem: it undermines its own premise. no animals but they have fur coats and leather and tasty joints to eat noodles out of ,,,yum! the world was destroyed so most people live off world except the opening shot looks like detroit in its hey-day not to mention the streets are packed and there are construction lights everywhere (there must have been an infrustructure stimulus packaged passed). the dialogue is horrendous "we scarred each other pretty good didn't we [giggle giggle]? we sure did!" . the genius scientist (jr) is also a naive idiot. the main character is not interested in anything that is going on and has no impetus to be involved in the movie at all. the opening scene where the rival bounty hunter is killed should be gripping and its just a guy getting shot. this film took me 8 times to watch before i completed it without falling asleep. then i saw the directors cut and it was even worse. how this makes anyones top ten sci fi films list is beyond me other than the fact that the lighting and cinematography are amazing. its a series of still photos and should be presented as such. Expand
  5. Dec 3, 2010
    After hearing so much about this film I decided to watch it, despite it being before my time. I am often surprised at how great some older films are, even ones made way before I was born but sadly this wasn't one of them. The good points about this film are; the visual effects are amazing and the atmosphere of this futuristic sky-scape is just incredible. The movie itself, however, lacks a solid story, plot, meaning and 'soul'. Its as if the film creators thought "wow this is such an incredible landscape we've created, now lets quickly write a story!" This is sad from a film that had the potential to be one of the greatest sci-fi films ever. The plot is just meaningless, the main character was meaningless and the cyborgs were all just meaningless. Expand
  6. Feb 5, 2014
    Before watching Blade Runner, I never understood why this film had such a massive influence on the cyberpunk genre. After watching it, I could only say that this film was a masterpiece. Great special effects, great acting and a great soundtrack, among other great things makes this film stand out in the science fiction category of films.
  7. Sep 15, 2013
    The Greatest sci-fi film ever created alongside Kubrick's 2001:A Space Odyssey. Blade Runner is NOT a film for everybody. It's a slow burn narrative, that only connects when you look at the bigger picture. The Final Cut version is my favorite movie of all-time. It's a perfect blend of sci-fi and noir. A dark look at a dystopian future where rain is constantly falling, darkness covers everything, and the streets are overcrowded and dirty. The film is absolutely stunning visually, and features some of the most beautiful cinematography ever put to film. The film contains heavy themes, and symbolism and after each viewing you always find something new. The film balances these themes without feeling pretentious or self-indulgent. Is this a film for everybody? No. But if you love films that make you think this is it. Expand
  8. Jan 31, 2014
    Beautifully shot, spectacular production value, shoddy acting in places great script, faithful but not a slave to the book its based. Incredible example of science fiction at its absolute best
  9. BKM
    Aug 4, 2013
    I've never been a huge science fiction buff, but considering Blade Runner's influence and stature, I did my duty and viewed both the theatrical version and the director's cut in order to compare and contrast. I have to say that the latter is the stronger film thanks in large part to its more ambiguous ending. The absence of Ford's narration isn't a major problem although it does help to clarify a couple of plot points. As for the film itself, it's visually stunning and has aged extremely well but the story is clunky and there's no human element to connect with. Expand
  10. Aug 27, 2012
    A very introspective film with all the action focused on Deckard and the Replicants without the audience really seeing much outside this group. Yes there are hints; the advertising for the off-world colonies, but apart from that it
  11. Jul 2, 2012
    Bes sci fi ever. A must see to everyone who likes the genre. The lighting is great, the look and fell is beyond belief. It is cinema at its finest. Character creation is beautiful and the well paced action blends perfectly with the psychological aspects of the plot.
  12. Mar 4, 2013
    Blade Runner is one of the most visually spectacular films of all time. Ridley Scott is an undisputed master of the visual craft and Blade Runner is his masterwork. Other elements of the movie work just as well; the atmosphere, special effects and music are all absolutely perfect. There are also so many metaphors and subtexts buried in the movie that it's possible to discover something new every time you watch. Blade Runner is an unbelievably fantastic film that is rightfully hailed as an all time classic. Expand
  13. Aug 9, 2014
    Blade Runner begins with a great crescendo by Vangelis and a futuristic landscape of L.A. The year is 2019. The story is based on Philip K. Dick's novel ''Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?'' But the final screenplay by Hampton Fancher and David Webb Peoples gave the whole story its dark, slow, hypnotically and unique emotional feeling.

    The iconic futurist illustrator and designer Syd
    Mead created with his art the blueprint for all visuals. And the special effects by Douglas Trumbull, Richard Yuricich and David Dryer are just superb for its time. Remember the police car landing on the rooftops of L.A. or balcony scene with the cruising police car.

    I watched this movie on silver-screen in 1982 and since then every decade following. Until today every shot in Blade Runner is just intricately detailed as anything a science-fiction film has yet envisioned and has not yet been exceeded.

    Blade Runner is a masterpiece of its own and one of the greatest science fiction films ever made.
  14. j30
    Jan 30, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The cerebral Blade Runner is Ridley Scott's second great science-fiction flick (the first being the intensely moody Alien). Not only are the visuals great to look at, but the brilliant, existential screenplay is what makes this movie so great. The author Philip K Dick wrote the novel in which the movie is based off of and I think he would have been proud, even though the movie is completely different story, but the themes are still there. With a line like "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I've watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die." That line sends chills down my spine. Expand
  15. Oct 15, 2011
    One of my favorite movies of all time. There are some moments of corny acting, and a few things happen in the movie that I still don't understand, but overall if you're a fan of sci-fi or noire you will love Blade Runner.
  16. Aug 17, 2010
    It goes far, but it doesn't go far enough. The world of the machine is not explored as deeply as I would have liked, in order to truly cement this as a classic film. Nevertheless, it stands on its own as a defining sci-fi noir film that really everyone should see who has an interest in the genre. Harrison Ford plays essentially Harrison Ford, but as a detective, and he does a very decent job satisfying the old, disgruntled lawman that he's supposed to play. Brion James plays a delightfully crazy android, aided by a brief but memorable performance by Daryl Hannah. The story weaves together expertly in this crime drama, but the characters really drive the plot along. This is important, because at about two hours in length, this film can seem slow to anyone who is more used to fast-paced modern science fiction. However, tension builds and the climax is worth it for those who are willing to give it a shot. All in all, its accolades are well-deserved, even if it doesn't make my personal favorite science fiction films list. This may be Ridley Scott's defining masterpiece in his ouevre.

    Verdict: Movie Win
  17. Aug 23, 2010
    2019, illegal androids on the loose, man out to stop them, falls in love with one of them.
    Classic Sci-Fi which still stands up well nearly 30 years on. Visually superb & still one of the greatest opening shots to a film also helped by the great score from Vangells.
    Decent cast & I still really like Edward James Olmos as the slightly unnerving Gaff.
    I've now watched the original, the
    Director's Cut & the Final Cut & I still prefer the original version overall. I just think it comes together a lot better. Expand
  18. Jan 8, 2011
    I think this is the only Harrison Ford movie which i don't like. I mean.... seriously what is special in this movie?
  19. Jun 1, 2012
    Excruciatingly boring. Less dialogue than Castaway. Slower than 2001. Less plot than Coffee and Cigarettes. Uninspiring acting. The only reason this film has a non-zero score is the effects, but that's not a good enough reason to watch this one.
  20. Aug 25, 2011
    Way ahead of it's time! This film is one of the hardest pills to swallow, but once you get it down, it sticks with you. It evokes such depth of thought and meditation. Rutger Hauer is excellent in this role though he doesn't have much screen time. Ford is great as ever with a particularly nuanced performance. The effects are stunning to this day. Watch this film and then watch it again a week or two later......let it "digest". Like a fine wine, it ages gracefully! Expand
  21. Aug 12, 2012
    It's the big ideas behind its iconic visuals that really makes Blade Runner such a great science-fiction film. Covering wide-ranging themes including what it means to be human, free will, future off-world colonisation, the meaning of dreams and the nature of reality, it's certainly a cerebral viewing experience. Ridley Scott is a master of genre-crossing - Alien was a hybrid of science-fiction and several sub-genres of horror, and Blade Runner is a science-fiction-noir. You've got the iconography and narrative structure of dark detective fiction encased in a radical, industrialised future city that appears as a strangely organic fusion of Eastern and Western culture. Though he reportedly had a bad time shooting the film, Harrison Ford gives one of the standout performances of his career as Rick Deckard, a weary hard-boiled detective who looks as though he's stepped straight out of a pulp detective novel. Daryl Hannah's impish and sinister take on a female fugitive android impresses as well, as does Edward James Olmos's mysterious mostly-silent detective Gaff - he doesn't say much, but his actions speak louder than words ever could. However, it's Rutger Hauer who really steals the show as Roy, the unhinged leader of the renegade "replicants" who Deckard is hunting, his performance a pitch-perfect deliverance of creepy-cool, and he gives one of the best farewell monologues on film (Haur responsible for choosing the most affecting parts of a speech written by David Webb Peoples) where Roy professes his humanity in moving, poetic verse as rain cascades down his grieving face. Vangellis' eerie, layered electronic score also helps no end to add further richness and emotion to the film. I'm not quite sure why there's still a debate about the implications of the film's final scene - it's pretty obvious what Scott intended. Blade Runner is undeniably one of the most influential of science-fiction films, and is an interesting modern take on a film noir to boot. I can't really say that I think Blade Runner is better that Scott's previous foray into sci-fi - yes there's another shadowy, amoral super-corporation pulling strings behind the scenes, but beyond that, Alien is just too different to compare. I sincerely hope Scott stops plundering his back-catalogue of successes at some point and moves onto something new, what with Prometheus being such a mixed bag of a film. There's a Prometheus sequel and another film in the Blade Runner universe in the works, which is more than a little worrying, and makes me wonder whether we should forcibly remove Ridley Scott's science-fiction crown before he really embarrasses himself. Expand
  22. Feb 19, 2012
    Blade Runner is a difficult movie to review as its a landmark science fiction masterpiece that has gone on to influence much of science fiction in movies and video games but on the other hand I find it boring as hell. Studying this movie for culture purposes is fascinating, watching for entertainment value is another thing.
  23. Nov 14, 2014
    Really into this film when I was younger and, although I was still impressed seeing it again recently, I can see that it has its imperfections. There's a lot of the story which is implausible, and, dare I say it, quite dull. Great performances make this worth watching (particularly the world weary cop Harrison Ford doing his best Philip Marlow impression) and of course Rutger Hauer. For me the real treat of this film is the uncompromising dystopian future depicted by Ridley Scott, with great special effects by Douglas Trumbull and of course a brilliant score by Vangelis. Bears little resemblance to the book by Philip K Dick; the film is essentially a 1940's film noir detective story set in the future. Expand
  24. Sep 19, 2011
    I heard great things about this movie and decided to DVR it. The movie's special effects are great but the movie all in all just didn't do it for me. The story was confusing to me and they kept switching from scene to scene. This movie's is just kind of based on opinion
  25. Sep 28, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First things first. Right off the bat, one thing I never understood about Blade Runner was its title. Why is it called Blade Runner? Deckard is a future cop who goes around hunting robots. He doesn't run on any blades, at all. There's no blade running. He drives a flying car. The movie never touches on the topic of blades or of running on blades. I just, I don't understand why the film has this title. Does blade running have anything to do with anything? I can't see it.

    Holden, the first blade runner agent goes and tests Leon, and gets blown away by a hidden gun when the replicant reacts badly to a question. Now, wouldn't it have been a lot safer if Holden had searched the suspect for weapons before administering the test? That seems like it would've been a prudent move. Replicants are artificially intelligent robots, as far as I can tell. Yet, why are they so similar to humans? All movie long, I was wondering why they didn't seem different from humans at all. You just couldn't tell them apart, there was nothing to give away their robotic nature. That's the reason for the Vought-kampf test, after all. But why were they so human? When Roy Batty stabs himself at the end of the film, what looks like blood comes out. It looked just like the blood of a normal person. But shouldn't there be some differentiation between us? Why would we make robots that are exactly like humans? "More human than human" as Tyrell's corporation puts it? Data on Star Trek is a good example of an AI android that clearly appears robotic. He's got golden eyes, and yellow metallic skin. There's a clear sign of otherness. We know just by looking at him that he's an android. Ash from Alien is another example of an android from a Ridley Scott film. Ash on the outside appears human, however his blood is milky white. That's a rather big indicator of artificial design, I'd say. But we don't get that at all with the replicants. Other then showing feats of superhuman strength, they're just like humans. The Tyrell corporation makes them more human than human, as we've said. But why the hell would they do that? The government has outlawed all replicants on earth, hasn't it? Doesn't that indicate a rather large and serious fear of replicants? Outlawing all intelligent robots on earth seems to me like people are rather afraid of intelligent robots. But it's okay to let the corporation keep making these intelligent robots as human as humanly possible? Completely indistinguishable from people, other then a rather lengthy and laborious empathy test? Doesn't this seem incredibly strange to anyone else? Why not make them look like robots, like Data, so we don't have to worry so much? Then, if they are on Earth, they're easy to spot. Wouldn't be so risky for blade runners, plus you wouldn't need to worry about accidentally retiring a human being. Or program some sort of dye into their body that's easily detectable with a scan? Or have some sort of killswitch in them so you can shut them off when they go rogue, rather then waiting for their four year lifespan to end?

    There are a few different models of Nexus-6 robots, we're told. Roy Batty is a combat model, while Pris is a pleasure model, aka a robot prostitute. Now alright, that's fine and well. But the prologue says that "Replicants were used Off-World as slave labor, in the hazardous exploration and colonization of other planets." Now, why would you so painstakingly try to create replicants that were as human as possible, and as intelligent as possible, if they're just going to be used for slave labor? I can see why a pleasure model like Pris might need to look as human as possible, since nobody who's going to an off-world brothel would want to **** something that looks like a robot. That wouldn't be so sexy. Dealing with the uncanny valley would also be a pretty big turnoff, I'd imagine. So it makes sense that Pris would look as human as possible. But for others, like Roy Batty... it doesn't really hold up. Trying to make a robot look as human as possible seems like a tremendous waste of time and effort if you're just going to use him for combat or slave labor. Does slave labor really require exceptional intelligence or perfect human likeness? I think not.

    And frankly, the world we're shown doesn't even seem capable of creating robots that are perfect facsimiles of human beings. Such a feat would require a highly advanced technological society, wouldn't it? And yet, I mean... this is a world where we see huge smokestacks in industrial pits belching flames. Maybe it's just me, but that looks rather primitive and unsophisticated. There are dilapidated buildings with gothic designs and J.F. Sebastian's home is filled with creepy dolls and androids that seem like they came right out of an 18th century opera. The flying car that Deckard rides in looks rather messy and junky, with wires running everywhere.
  26. Jun 7, 2013
    Love this movie. A true sci-fi picture. Explores a lot of great philosophical issues and makes cool social commentary without feeling overbearing. Harrison Ford is great in it as is Rutger Hauer (the star of the show imo). It's just a great film. If you haven't seen it, regardless of your age, do so. It has brilliant set design and art direction. It's a visual feast as well as a disturbing picture into the human condition and morality. Expand
  27. Mar 21, 2012
    I have finished this epochal cult filmâ
  28. Aug 24, 2012
    Ridley Scott's 1982 film Blade Runner is an adaptation of Hollywood favourite Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?. Set in a futuristic 2019 Los Angeles, the humans remaining on Earth populate a poisoned planet. Scott and his special effects team created a sprawling, multi-cultural, dark and dystopian metropolis dense with towering skyscrapers in between which flying police cars patrol. The setting of the film is visionary and Dick and Scott deserve all the praise they have received for it.

    The soundtrack is provided by Vangelis (Chariots of Fire) and provides the perfect backdrop to the gloomy futuristic landscape Scott creates.

    Technology has allowed the fictional Tyrell Corporation to develop organic androids, known as replicants, for use as slaves in off-world colonies. Outlawed on Earth, Harrison Ford plays Deckard, a retired replicant hunter (known as a blade runner) tasked with tracking and 'retiring' a group of rogue replicants who have returned to Earth. The replicants are lead by Rutger Hauer's intelligent and villainous Roy Barry, with the intent of forcing Tyrell to modify the replicants and extended their lifespan. Ford plays the burnt out, gritty drunkard Deckard with the grumpiness of Han Solo but thankfully with none of the sarcasm or cheesy lines. Hauer is excellent as he becomes scarily unhinged and seemingly indestructible towards the film's climax. Sean Young plays an experimental female replicant, designed with memories with the belief that she is actually human, with whom Deckard falls for.

    I must be honest that with this being the first time I have watched the film, I completely missed the plot suggestions that Deckard himself may be a replicant so maybe I need to re-watch the film from this point of view.
  29. May 18, 2012
    Gritty, dark, beautiful, scary, alien. Five words that I can use to sum up what Blade Runner represents to me. A brilliant film that ever science fiction fan should make a point of seeing.
  30. Apr 4, 2012
    The very definition of cyberpunk. The best soundtrack to a movie ever, by the one and only Vangelis. Revolutionary from a technical standpoint. A great story. A true cult classic.
  31. Jul 17, 2014
    There are many problems with Blade Runner, but let us start with the positives. First, the setting is great. The futuristic city they built is beautiful and amazingly huge in scope. In addition, the general feel of the film is cool and the lighting is perfect. The acting is also solid. However, beyond this, the film is a trainwreck. The story is terrible. It is overly complex and nearly impossible to follow, even if you pay attention. The action is stupid and poorly done. The script is lacking as well. The film is not slow, but it never really hooks you in. I was never made to care about anything that happened. In addition, the ending is terrible, largely because it creepy and borderline sadistic, which completely turned me off and made me entirely repulsed. For a film that is now considered a classic, I find myself agreeing with the initial negative reception. Expand
  32. Aug 24, 2013
    Classics of Cyberpunk movies. Great visuals that still look awesome nowadays. Awesome noire atmosphere. I can't even imagine how breathtaking it looked back in 1982.
  33. Dec 2, 2013
    From the outset, you are treated to some dazzling cinematography, special effects and set pieces. Everything looked and felt so ahead of its time. This is a classic example of neo-noir_ shady characters and a lot of detective work. The mood was consistently dark and forbidding. I haven't seen such impressive world-building elsewhere.

    The plot followed a bunch of replicants, who are kind
    of cyborgs, on the loose. A blade runner, someone whose job is to track and kill them, is set on the case. Some detective work follows until the confrontations.

    I especially liked the character of Roy Batty. He was the charismatic smiling yet menacing leader of the replicants. The villains were the best part, very conflicted and engaging, perhaps more so than the protagonist. That's what I loved about the movie. It was less about the plot than an opportunity to peep into a highly complex, morally corrupt future world which despite everything, was extremely appealing. It was a pleasant surprise to see Harrison Ford not portraying his self, even though there were hints of his attempts to do so but were mostly suppressed by probably the director.

    The technology and architecture, and the general cityscape depicted was exquisite in its advanced and yet run-down state, like the future we were watching had already started to decay and deform, and we missed its pinnacle of prosperity. This Los Angeles of the future has little to no sun, a lot of rain, smog and an apparent Chinese majority. Except for the latter, where it is replaced by the Hispanic community, I think LA is headed that way. I especially liked the feel of it. The sense it evoked was one of deep, brooding hopelessness. The movie set the standard for much of the sci-fi flicks to follow.

    This has to be one of the most puzzling movies I have ever seen. A single viewing may not yield feelings of grandeur and praise but a hint of disappointment. Only when I watched it again did I embrace it fully and connected with some characters, oddly from the wrong side of the conflict. The Final Cut version was ripe with such spectacle and detail that it would be worth it even if all else failed. The score, retro electronic music, enhances the experience and pleasure. A joy ride from start to finish, and a masterpiece in its originality and imagination.
  34. Dec 18, 2013
    Blade Runner is an extremely stylized, visually unique, and darkly atmospheric sci-fi classic, but it's held back from true perfection by some very noticeable flaws. The noir jazz music doesn't always mix well with the rest of the soundtrack. I kept wishing that the saxophone would just go away. Harrison Ford's voiceover also felt vey forced and cheesy to me. Other than some minor gripes however, this is still one heck of a movie. It's all enveloped in an eerie atmosphere unlike anything else out there. Much of this comes from the visual decisions. The art direction is superbly gothic and near non-stop rain plights the futuristic city of L.A. for almost the entire movie. The action is also unique in that it possesses a cold, strange, and gritty aesthetic, most evidently seen in the scene where Decker is being hunted by the lead replicant inside of the abandoned building. There are also scenes of emotional intensity here, mostly related to the replicants' yearning for a less abbreviated life. It's not as tightly directed as Scott's other sci-fi classic Alien, but what is? It makes up for this by tackling much more ambitious thematic content than that movie. It's mostly successful at this, but it still doesn't feel as weighty as it could have been to me. Perhaps it will grow on me with repeat viewings. Expand
  35. Jul 8, 2013
    A very gritty, interesting, and entertaining sci-fi film. Harrison Ford gives a really good performance as Declared and my favorite part of the film is the gritty dirty feel of the movie.
  36. May 10, 2013
    The subtle direction of Ridley Scott, this film transforms into a work of art without equal, telling the story of a mercenary who fell in love with his pod trabalho.Ele seem cold, harsh and violent as the film but her final packaged by a music Vangelis phenomenal, makes it all worthwhile resulting in one of the most satisfactory films of Ridley Scott.
  37. Aug 23, 2013
    All versions prove able in their genre of dystopian sci-fi. Rutger Hauer, to be frank, should have gotten a f***ing oscar nomination for his role. 'Tears in Rain' remains one of the greatest monologues of all time, and the fact that he made it up, makes it all the more magnificent. Great sci-fi, The Tech-noir compliments the story brilliantly. What was with the people of 1982
  38. Aug 30, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First I must state that I have only seen this version of the film from 2007, so I have no other versions to compare it to. This movie is brilliant and one of the best sci-fi films out there. But it also embodies the film noir genre really well too. The music is very good and with every scene it fits perfectly. The visuals in this movie works so well and Douglas Trumball's special effects are brilliant, the city looks beautiful. I also like the look of this future and it fits within the story perfectly. Each and every one of the characters is complex and it's interesting to watch. Rutger Hauer gives such an amazing performance, his speech in the climax is just as beautiful as some of the imagery from the film, and is also one of my favourite movie scenes. This movie marks a great moment in cinema, one of the best out there. Expand
  39. Oct 13, 2013
    An insanely captivating and interesting film that will without a doubt give most viewers a truly unique and original cinematic experience. In my opinion this is the greatest Sci-fi film ever made, it stands far taller than Sci-fi titans such as Star Wars, E.T and Encounters of the Third Kind. Everything from the gloomy setting to the incredible dialogues, this film more than earns it's reputation as a household name. Expand
  40. Jun 16, 2014
    Blade Runner is a sci-fi masterpiece and my personal best sci-fi movie of all times compared to 2001: A Space Odyssey and Solaris. It is impossible for me to find out how they managed to imagine and construct the dark, gloomy future city of L.A in 2019, a civilized yet severely polluted metropolis covered with but dust, toxic rain and eternal darkness - exactly what is going to befall mankind in an intermediate future should we continue our eco-destroying behavior. Set in future, when men rely on Replicants - robots - to exploit it's colonies outside Earth and our planet is reduced to only a dead planet with no trees or green resources, Blade Runner is both a 80%-and-increasing prophecy about human tomorrow and a visually dazzling sci-fi thriller which has ensured it's place as one of the greatest sci-fi flicks of all times Expand
  41. Jan 7, 2014
    This is an AMAZING movie. It is by far one of my favorite movies of all time, and so far my favorite Ridley Scott movie. Harrison Ford is great as Deckard, and the world envisioned is darkly mesmerizing. Details, no big deal if there are a lot of details. That just means watch the damn movie and pay attention, John Smith. Or if you can't wrap your head around the intricate details then that's not the movie's fault, that's your fault. Expand
  42. Sep 19, 2014
    I love this movie, but it's mostly because of the sets and scenery and cinematography, not to mention the palpable sense of living in a cyber-dystopic future surrounded by whirling fans, dark lighting, grates, and the immense technological and populous detail Ridley Scott created from his imagination. It's overwhelming in a tasteful sense, feeling like it's saturated but unavoidable and inevitable, a dark cynical but feasible future that lays at the back of our minds in our modern world. It reminds of the detail of Star Wars and Aliens, the former of which I'm sure inspired Ridley Scott and the latter an obvious predecessor. Even Deckard's cupboards and blinds resemble the halls and rooms of the Nostromo.

    My issues however with the movie, and what sets it from going to the top, are that the substance is less than the scenery. The plot itself is riveting, but the detail and development is definitely thinner than the long scenes and abundant set flourishings belie. The tension between the characters is just as riveting, but there is much more implied than the dialogue holds up and their actions follow through on.

    Ridley Scott had a lot of philosophical material to work with here, but unfortunately the writing doesn't take full advantage of it so it feels more in my head than onscreen. There's also some nonsensicle behavior by the characters seemingly for the sake of effect or drama, which I think got in the way of what could have been some real brain-twisting questions with the androids and what humans are capable of creating.

    Overall, unforgettable for me, and growing up, a unrivaled definition of a dystopic alternate-future, as if Ridley took a camera through his own mind exploring every dark grated tunnel and over-populated night street. Deckard's apartment alone is unforgettable for its abundance of technological art forms, but I only wish there was more meat to this bone as there was garnishings.

Universal acclaim - based on 10 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 10
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 10
  3. Negative: 1 out of 10
  1. 100
    Grand enough in scale to carry its many Biblical and mythological references, Blade Runner never feels heavy or pretentious -- only more and more engrossing with each viewing. It helps, too, that it works as pure entertainment.
  2. The grafting of 40s hard-boiled detective story with SF thriller creates some dysfunctional overlaps, and the movie loses some force whenever violence takes over, yet this remains a truly extraordinary, densely imagined version of both the future and the present, with a look and taste all its own.
  3. As before, the movie is more impressive for its finely detailed vision of Los Angeles as a futuristic slum than for its story, acting, or message. It's all downhill after the first few eye-dazzling minutes. [2 Oct 1992]