Blade Runner

User Score
8.9

Universal acclaim- based on 622 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 14 out of 622

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

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

User Reviews

  1. Apr 24, 2016
    9
    "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
    "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.
    Expand
  2. Apr 9, 2016
    10
    The moment I saw the opening shot of the futuristic city of LA being reflected in the human iris, I was hooked onto Blade Runner. This is possibly my favorite movie of all time; definitely my favorite sci-fi movie of all time.

    The plot can be hard to follow, but after viewing it multiple times, I found it to be very fascinating and rich with themes like religion, death and man's
    The moment I saw the opening shot of the futuristic city of LA being reflected in the human iris, I was hooked onto Blade Runner. This is possibly my favorite movie of all time; definitely my favorite sci-fi movie of all time.

    The plot can be hard to follow, but after viewing it multiple times, I found it to be very fascinating and rich with themes like religion, death and man's reliance on technology. It's the sort of plot that will leave you thinking even after the end credits have rolled.

    The main characters of Deckard (Harrison Ford) & Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer) are equally compelling, much of which is due to the outstanding performances of both actors. Roy Batty's poetic "Tears in the Rain" speech is in my mind one of the most memorable monologues in movie history.

    If you can't appreciate the film's story, you can at least appreciate it as a visual spectacle. This is one of the most beautifully shot movies that I have ever seen. The shots of the neon-filled city are breathtaking, & the imagery plays off of the movie's themes to the letter.

    The futuristic dystopian city of LA is absolutely jaw-dropping, and makes you want to see more of this world. Greek composer Vangelis helps bring this world to life with his unique score, a beautiful symphony of futuristic synthesizers.
    Expand
  3. Apr 7, 2016
    9
    Even today, Blade Runner becomes a perfect success to movie history and then normally every day, we would make movies (at least one or two on just one person). Play safe, people, and watch Blade Runner every day.
  4. Mar 13, 2016
    8
    In the nearly 25 years since its original release, Blade Runner has become one of the most discussed, debated, and influential science fiction movies. These days, it's almost impossible to find a gritty science fiction motion picture that doesn't owe at least a small debt to Blade Runner's visual style. The movie is also one of the first major motion pictures to have been given a redIn the nearly 25 years since its original release, Blade Runner has become one of the most discussed, debated, and influential science fiction movies. These days, it's almost impossible to find a gritty science fiction motion picture that doesn't owe at least a small debt to Blade Runner's visual style. The movie is also one of the first major motion pictures to have been given a red carpet "Director's Edition." In cooperation with Warner Brothers, Ridley Scott re-tooled the movie, making minor changes and eliminating the much-maligned voiceover. In late 1992, the new version was released in a limited number of theaters and was universally acclaimed as the "definitive version" by fans worldwide.

    Considering how respected Blade Runner is in the 2000s, it's difficult to remember that it was widely viewed as a failure during its initial release. Reviews, for the most part, were negative. (This isn't surprising. Cutting-edge science fiction is often viewed negatively at first then re-evaluated later. 2001 is a classic example.) The box office was tepid, and the film failed to make back its production costs. Viewers, expecting something more popcorn-oriented from a Harrison Ford science fiction movie, were disappointed by the dark, serious nature of the project. The cast and crew, who had nearly rebelled against the director during production, were in some cases unenthusiastic in their support of the finished product.

    The central ethical question posed by Blade Runner has been popular in science fiction since it’s the inception of the genre: what is life? It's the same issue pondered by Mary Shelly in Frankenstein, translated into the far future. Man is no longer building misshapen creatures out of disused body parts. Now the creatures are nearly perfect replicas of human beings. They live, eat, drink, make love, think, feel, and perish. But do they have souls? Is Deckard merely consigning scrap to the slag heap or is he killing? That question has worn on him. According to Bryant, he's the best there ever was, but that was in the past. Now, he's burned out.

    Blade Runner is as much of a morality play as it is an action/adventure story. The question of whether or not the replicants are "alive" echoes themes from countless novels, movies, and television series. It lies at the heart of Issac Asimov's I, Robot (both the book and the movie). It's central to the premise of the current TV series Battlestar Galactica (which borrows Blade Runner's "skinjob" slang to describe human-looking androids). Blade Runner didn't invent the issue but it arguably did more to popularize it than any other post-Asimov source.

    Those expecting to see Harrison Ford in full Han Solo/Indiana Jones action hero mode are primed for disappointment. Deckard is still capable of getting the job done, but he's not gung-ho about it. He's a reluctant cop, and his reluctance becomes more apparent as the movie unfolds. He's also not the blade runner he used to be. He does the job, but gets the hell kicked out of him on several occasions and, without Rachael's timely intervention when he confronts Leon, he wouldn't be around to chase Pris and Roy.

    The final confrontation between Deckard and Roy is atypical of an action movie. The formula requires that these two engage in a long, hard one-on-one struggle before Deckard vanquishes Roy. That's not what happens. The fight occurs, but Deckard is the loser. Roy saves him, even though he has every reason to let Deckard die. The two end up spending Roy's last hours together, waiting for his four-year life to end. Why does Roy save Deckard? Perhaps, recognizing that the end is at hand, Roy doesn't want to die alone. His companions are no more; Deckard is the only one who will stay with him. This action, more than any other, argues for the "humanity" of the replicants. What could be more human than to not want to die alone?

    Blade Runner is not flawless. There is an irritating continuity error pertaining to the number of replicants who made it to Earth. (The original number is six, with one killed. However, Deckard is given only four profiles to track down.) The love story with Rachael doesn't work, in large part because both Ford and Sean Young underplay their roles to such extremes that its impossible to believe either could feel anything for the other. The romance is necessary to the story and it emphasizes the blurred line between men and replicants but it fails on an emotional level.

    Blade Runner is a rare science fiction movie so full of material that pages can be written about it without scratching the surface. A review like this can provide little more than an overview. A detailed exploration of the movie, its style, and its mysteries requires dedication that only someone immersed in Blade Runner lore can provide.
    Expand
  5. Mar 12, 2016
    10
    Let me say that I absolutely LOVE this film. It has been my absolute favorite film since it released When I was in college. I've watched it several times since then and always see or learn something new. The fact that Bladerunner 2 will happen sometime soon and Ridley is directing it should only make me have a new fondness for my all time favorite film!
  6. Jan 15, 2016
    10
    One of the best sci-fi movie and written soundtrack to it by genius composer Vangelis. And of course great acting performance by Harrison Ford, Sean Young and Rutger Hauer. My personal score is 10/10
  7. Nov 21, 2015
    9
    Imagine what will happen if stylish neo-noir science-fiction movie will be directed by young Ridley Scott at the peak of his career, based on the novel by talented amphetamine-addict, who is scribbling on drugs countless stories about borderline states, disguising themselves as science-fiction (Philip K. Dick), special effects in this film will be made by legendary Douglas Trumbull,Imagine what will happen if stylish neo-noir science-fiction movie will be directed by young Ridley Scott at the peak of his career, based on the novel by talented amphetamine-addict, who is scribbling on drugs countless stories about borderline states, disguising themselves as science-fiction (Philip K. Dick), special effects in this film will be made by legendary Douglas Trumbull, Vangelis will write music, starring charismatic Harrison Ford, beautiful Sean Young, ingenious Rutger Hauer ("tears in the rain" line is his invention) and young Daryl Hannah? Well, the movie will get a commercial failure and the avalanche of criticism in the United States. That serves as another proof that nor commercial success, nor critics reviews should not be taken into account when assessing the motion picture arts.

    "Blade Runner" is one of the last specimens of the pure art in the mainstream cinematography - it's when public's attention is drawn not by hurrying plot, but by exquisite picture, the so-called atmosphere that combines a certain style of storytelling, visual style, including special effects, high-quality music and actors' ensemble. If we add to this some philosophical depth and give the public time to reflect on each episode, without being distracted (harassed) by the following one, you will get an almost perfect motion picture. And if you appreciate beautiful motion pictures, then "Blade Runner" is your movie.

    As of the idea of "Blade Runner", it is not obvious and at the same time is simple, like all true ideas - if at the beginning of the movie Deckard required Voight-Kampff test in order to determine whether Rachel a human being or not, at the end just two questions were enough for this. Actually, no more are required.

    9 out of 10

    P.S. A small remark. If before watching "Blade Runner" you have not read the novel on which the movie is based - "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Philip K. Dick - it is better not to read (otherwise you'll have false expectations). If you decide which version of the movie to choose, then just do not take "The Final Cut". I would suggest "The International Cut", as the most conscientious observance of neo- noir atmosphere and best explanation of the plot twists. Although "The Director's Cut" and unofficial (but most complete) "The Electric Unicorn Cut" have their advantages, but these versions are not as atmospheric and rather intended for hardcore fans of "Blade Runner". As I see it, director's hints on Deckard's artificial memory (dream about a unicorn and paper unicorn near his flat at the end, some dialogues) are excessive, contradict logic and unnecessary overcomplicate movie's main idea.
    Expand
  8. Oct 27, 2015
    10
    What an amazing movie! this dark neon futuristic Los Angeles, the fight for survival of the replicants, rutger hauer character, i think this movie wasnt a hit in theaters because its was beyond that time, off course it has flaws like every movie but is its pretty unique in its own way, the visuals , actors performances, Vangelis soundtrack is so perfect for this movie!! dont wait a sec getWhat an amazing movie! this dark neon futuristic Los Angeles, the fight for survival of the replicants, rutger hauer character, i think this movie wasnt a hit in theaters because its was beyond that time, off course it has flaws like every movie but is its pretty unique in its own way, the visuals , actors performances, Vangelis soundtrack is so perfect for this movie!! dont wait a sec get a copy, you wont regret it Expand
  9. Sep 28, 2015
    9
    Blade Runner is great noir sci-fi, great mood and setting. The android characters (especially Rutger Hauer) give off an aura of aliveness, which fits the story very well. The cinematography and sets are excellent (as with other Ridley Scott films). All-in-all Blade Runner lives up to its reputation as a sci-fi classic.
  10. Sep 26, 2015
    4
    Blade Runner is widely considered to be the best Science Fiction movie ever made. It is on almost every top 100 list, and that's why I am reviewing it. To tell you why it is one of the most overrated films of all time. Science Fiction is my favorite genre, and the author of Blade Runner, Philip K. Dick is one of my favorite authors, but Blade Runner is far from his best work. I would go asBlade Runner is widely considered to be the best Science Fiction movie ever made. It is on almost every top 100 list, and that's why I am reviewing it. To tell you why it is one of the most overrated films of all time. Science Fiction is my favorite genre, and the author of Blade Runner, Philip K. Dick is one of my favorite authors, but Blade Runner is far from his best work. I would go as far as saying that Blade Runner isn't even in his top ten, and if it wasn't for Ridley Scott, it wouldn't have been the first film adaptation of Dick's work. At the time, the special effects were innovative and exciting, but they fail to live up to today's standards. With that being said, all that's left over is a simple story that follows a futuristic police chase and a very cheesy, awkward, love story. In a futuristic Los Angeles, android technology has been perfected. These replicants are used for labor an odd jobs, but occasionally, they become aware and try to run for their freedom. That is when the blade runners are called in to eliminate them. The best Blade Runner around is Deckard (Harrison Ford), a man who doesn't love his job, but always gives one hundred and ten percent. After three replicants escape from the moon, Deckard is called in to track them down and this is the whole premise of the movie. There isn't much of a side story and the rare breaks in the action, rarely prove to be substantive. The film is just you're typical chase with some very weird elements. For example, why does Rutger Hauer take off all his cloths before he fights Harrison Ford, and for that matter, what the hell is he talking about the whole time? How about the talking toys, can you tell me they weren't just a bit creepy and out of character for the rest of the film? Finally, we're in Los Angeles, why is everything Chinese? The story is just a very strange chase through a futuristic nightmare scenario for Los Angeles. Yes, Harrison Ford was terrific, and yes, it must of been the hardest thing Ridley Scott ever had to direct, but the film and story itself are very simplistic and certainly not worthy of legendary status. I love Philip K. Dick and I am obsessed with Science Fiction, but watching Blade Runner for the third time, I was still just as bored and confused as I was the other two times I saw it. How can anything that makes a person feel that way be considered legendary? Expand
  11. Jun 28, 2015
    10
    One of my top 3 movies of all time (With Drive and Magnolia) Probably Ridley's finest moment in film, with gorgeous special FX that still hold up to this day. Personally 'The Final Cut' is my favourite version, with my fave ending out of all of them. Ford is fantastic as Deckard, portraying a broken man perfectly, and keeping him constantly interesting. All performances are fantasticOne of my top 3 movies of all time (With Drive and Magnolia) Probably Ridley's finest moment in film, with gorgeous special FX that still hold up to this day. Personally 'The Final Cut' is my favourite version, with my fave ending out of all of them. Ford is fantastic as Deckard, portraying a broken man perfectly, and keeping him constantly interesting. All performances are fantastic throughout, even Olmos who hardly speaks a word is brilliant. The FX still look great, and in HD it looks even better. The writing is also top notch, even though its very different to its source material.
    Overall a fantastic Sci-Fi that I can't stop watching, definitely one of the greatest films of all time!
    Expand
  12. May 9, 2015
    9
    In the nearly 25 years since its original release, Blade Runner has become one of the most discussed, debated, and influential science fiction movies. These days, it's almost impossible to find a gritty science fiction motion picture that doesn't owe at least a small debt to Blade Runner's visual style. The movie is also one of the first major motion pictures to have been given a redIn the nearly 25 years since its original release, Blade Runner has become one of the most discussed, debated, and influential science fiction movies. These days, it's almost impossible to find a gritty science fiction motion picture that doesn't owe at least a small debt to Blade Runner's visual style. The movie is also one of the first major motion pictures to have been given a red carpet "Director's Edition." In cooperation with Warner Brothers, Ridley Scott re-tooled the movie, making minor changes and eliminating the much-maligned voiceover. In late 1992, the new version was released in a limited number of theaters and was universally acclaimed as the "definitive version" by fans worldwide.

    Considering how respected Blade Runner is in the 2000s, it's difficult to remember that it was widely viewed as a failure during its initial release. Reviews, for the most part, were negative. (This isn't surprising. Cutting-edge science fiction is often viewed negatively at first then re-evaluated later. 2001 is a classic example.) The box office was tepid, and the film failed to make back its production costs. Viewers, expecting something more popcorn-oriented from a Harrison Ford science fiction movie, were disappointed by the dark, serious nature of the project. The cast and crew, who had nearly rebelled against the director during production, were in some cases unenthusiastic in their support of the finished product.

    Blade Runner is as much of a morality play as it is an action/adventure story. The question of whether or not the replicants are "alive" echoes themes from countless novels, movies, and television series. It lies at the heart of Issac Asimov's I, Robot (both the book and the movie). It's central to the premise of the current TV series Battlestar Galactica (which borrows Blade Runner's "skinjob" slang to describe human-looking androids). Blade Runner didn't invent the issue but it arguably did more to popularize it than any other post-Asimov source.

    Those expecting to see Harrison Ford in full Han Solo/Indiana Jones action hero mode are primed for disappointment. Deckard is still capable of getting the job done, but he's not gung-ho about it. He's a reluctant cop, and his reluctance becomes more apparent as the movie unfolds. He's also not the blade runner he used to be. He does the job, but gets the hell kicked out of him on several occasions and, without Rachael's timely intervention when he confronts Leon, he wouldn't be around to chase Pris and Roy.

    Blade Runner is not known for action set pieces. There are four, each associated with the death of a replicant. The most exaggerated are the conflicts between Deckard and Pris and Deckard and Roy, but there's nothing in either to match the elaborate workings of Ford's previous movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Blade Runner delivers its share of tension and suspense, but Ridley Scott's intention with this film was to make something worth thinking about not just a mindless jolt of adrenaline.

    The movie is loosely based on Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep by Philip K. Dick, and it represents the first time any of the prolific science fiction author's works was adapted for a motion picture. Reportedly, Dick was pleased with the result even though Blade Runner diverged considerably from his story. What most impressed Dick was the look of the film and that has become Blade Runner's legacy. The mixture of high technology (air cars) and poverty (fires in trash cans) results in indelible images. Blade Runner takes place in darkness and rain. The film noir influences are evident, but so are the science fictions ones. Scott's ability to fuse these two has created a blueprint that dozens of other "serious" science fiction films have followed. The Blade Runner look is in direct contrast to the antiseptic appearance of Star Wars and Star Trek, the reigning science fiction poster franchises of the day. (Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was released three weeks prior to Blade Runner in 1982.)

    Blade Runner is a rare science fiction movie so full of material that pages can be written about it without scratching the surface. A review like this can provide little more than an overview. A detailed exploration of the movie, its style, and its mysteries requires dedication that only someone immersed in Blade Runner lore can provide. Currently, the film is available in the United States only in the director's cut. Warner Brothers, however, has promised an exhaustive box set next year with multiple versions. It will be interesting to see whether those editions offer new insights or expand upon the film's already rich tapestry.
    Expand
  13. Apr 17, 2015
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. For those who are unfamiliar with a neo-noir its a movie that revolves around several cinematic elements like mystery crime and thriller, with a smoke haze atmosphere and stylish cinematography with reduced used of lighting to create blackened atmospheres, now Ridley Scott will redefine the genre with a dash of sci-fi with philosophical and thematic elements and we get a legendary masterpiece of what would the future be like from the mind of acclaimed writer Philip K. Dick

    Harrison Ford is chilling as the veteran blade runner Rick Deckard, of 2017 dystopian LA now a massive multicultural community covered heavily in rain and smoke, now run by private businesses who rely on replicants (androids built to look like humans) to work off planet in the lunar colonies to help power the city. Rick is assigned to one final hunt to destroy four escaped replicants (featuring Rutger Hauer and Daryl Hannah) on the run who have illegally entered LA, but he later finds his aggression to replicants challenged when he meets Rachel (Sean Young) a newly designed replicant who is unaware she is one herself, which frustrates Deckard till he sees for himself the senselessness of his job as a blade runner which also questions if he is really human or not.

    Ridley Scott's mythological visionary is poured out its a defining new screen legend that questions the humans value life in the future and the possibilities of the machines wanting the same value as ours, one of the greatest sci-fi masterpieces since 2001 A Space Odyssey, a dystopian flick for the human soul and not for the feint of heart, a film that will define another kind of film of such significance
    Expand
  14. Mar 10, 2015
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Blade Runner has many quotable lines and stunning special effects. Blade Runner was an innovative Science Fiction movie and it is a timeless classic. One of my favourite lines in the movie is when Tyrell
    and Roy are talking to one another. "The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long and you have
    burned so very brightly Roy. I've done questionable things, also extraordinary things revel in your time.
    Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for." The music that plays during this scene
    transmits a haunting mood to the audience. The music perfectly fits the scene and the style of the movie.
    Blade Runner was and will always be a triumph in the Science Fiction/Action genre.
    Expand
  15. Jan 23, 2015
    9
    The visuals are amazing, Los Angeles of 2019 is truly a beautifully realised, if not bleak and grim, future vision. Full of memorable moments and Rutger Hauers role is the icing on the cake. Have to give credit to the score and soundscape, helps to build the gloomy atmosphere.
  16. Jan 14, 2015
    10
    Planet Noir

    I hereby declare Blade Runner the best sci-fi movie of all time. Arguments? No? Okay. So long. Please upvote the guest book on your way out. WAIT! There's more. At the risk of whistling conspiracies and setting off inappropriate vibrations in your slacks, you see, this Ridley K. Dick concoction is going on right now. While we're all transfixed by the endlessly goofy
    Planet Noir

    I hereby declare Blade Runner the best sci-fi movie of all time. Arguments? No? Okay. So long. Please upvote the guest book on your way out.

    WAIT! There's more. At the risk of whistling conspiracies and setting off inappropriate vibrations in your slacks, you see, this Ridley K. Dick concoction is going on right now. While we're all transfixed by the endlessly goofy droppings from the web, forever staring down and swiping things on our smarty-pants phones, retweeting selfies of infinitely mirrored selfies; proliferating at light speed, every aspect of humanity is being replicated, perfected, mechanized, optimized, upgraded, fortified, robofied, Googlized, quantumized, DNA'd and NSA'd and will soon converge to fall upon and supplant us, and Harrison Ford, despite looking trim for his years, will be too old to stop it! And the irony to end all ironies is that we, as the irresponsibly arrogant, over-infested and narcissistic caretakers and consumers, and the colossal defecators of this broken-down, flea-bag of a planet, are entirely fundamentally responsible. No, the irony of all ironies is that a world exclusively dominated by self-correcting technocratic cyborgs with zettabytes of artificial intelligence will be a vast improvement. The androids are saving the planet! AHHH, run for your life! Blade Runner is both an expired cautionary tale and emerging utopian fantasy.

    Oh, you knew this already? Very well. Carry on. Enjoy your self-driving cars and virtual nature tours.
    Expand
  17. Nov 14, 2014
    9
    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 meReally 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
  18. Sep 19, 2014
    8
    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 andI 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.
    Expand
  19. Aug 9, 2014
    10
    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
    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.
    Expand
  20. Jul 17, 2014
    2
    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 nearlyThere 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
  21. Jun 16, 2014
    10
    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 befallBlade 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
  22. Feb 5, 2014
    10
    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.
  23. Jan 31, 2014
    10
    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
  24. Jan 7, 2014
    10
    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 thenThis 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
  25. Dec 18, 2013
    8
    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 minorBlade 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
  26. Dec 2, 2013
    10
    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
    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.
    Expand
  27. Oct 13, 2013
    10
    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'sAn 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
  28. Sep 15, 2013
    10
    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 coversThe 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
  29. Aug 30, 2013
    9
    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
  30. Aug 24, 2013
    8
    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.
  31. Aug 23, 2013
    10
    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
  32. BKM
    Aug 4, 2013
    5
    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 toI'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
  33. Jul 8, 2013
    8
    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.
  34. Jun 7, 2013
    9
    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 disturbingLove 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
  35. May 10, 2013
    9
    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.
  36. Mar 4, 2013
    10
    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 newBlade 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
  37. Aug 27, 2012
    10
    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
  38. Aug 24, 2012
    8
    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 flyingRidley 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.
    Expand
  39. Aug 12, 2012
    9
    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 ofIt'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
  40. Jul 2, 2012
    10
    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.
  41. Jun 1, 2012
    3
    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.
  42. May 18, 2012
    8
    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.
  43. Apr 4, 2012
    10
    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.
  44. Mar 21, 2012
    9
    I have finished this epochal cult filmâ
  45. Feb 19, 2012
    8
    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.
  46. j30
    Jan 30, 2012
    10
    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
  47. Dec 26, 2011
    7
    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).
  48. Oct 15, 2011
    9
    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.
  49. Sep 28, 2011
    4
    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.
    Expand
  50. Sep 19, 2011
    5
    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
  51. Aug 25, 2011
    9
    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 aWay 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
  52. Aug 12, 2011
    10
    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 rememberedWhen 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
  53. Jul 24, 2011
    0
    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 furthis 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
  54. Jan 8, 2011
    5
    I think this is the only Harrison Ford movie which i don't like. I mean.... seriously what is special in this movie?
  55. Dec 3, 2010
    3
    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 aAfter 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
  56. Nov 5, 2010
    10
    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 revolvesThis 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. Collapse
  57. Aug 23, 2010
    9
    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
    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
  58. Aug 17, 2010
    9
    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 decentIt 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
    Expand
  59. DrewK
    May 1, 2010
    10
    Best movie ever. Matthew H is either borderline retarded or too stupid to know any different.
  60. Santa
    Feb 3, 2010
    10
    What interested me most, whether this Christian Science Monitor David Sterritt feel embarrassed after his review of (master-piece) Blade Runner ?!
  61. MatthewH.
    Nov 7, 2009
    0
    Worst Sci Fi movie I have ever watched. I don't understand the hype behind this movie. It's slow. Uninspired. And tries to be something that it's not. As in good.
  62. AlexR.n
    Nov 3, 2009
    10
    Like oyher user reviews here, I didn't think too much of Blade Runner when I first saw it. But as I got older, the film just got better and better until I saw the Bluray version in 2007 and it just hit me like a dull thud; Blade Runner is my favorite movie of all time. Every time I watch it I catch something else that I didn't notice before. It's so beautiful and profound Like oyher user reviews here, I didn't think too much of Blade Runner when I first saw it. But as I got older, the film just got better and better until I saw the Bluray version in 2007 and it just hit me like a dull thud; Blade Runner is my favorite movie of all time. Every time I watch it I catch something else that I didn't notice before. It's so beautiful and profound and... I could go on, but I wont. Best movie EVER. Expand
  63. MarkW.
    Aug 26, 2008
    10
    This movie, much like 2001: A space odyssey, is more an experience or art and philosophy than a great way to be entertained for two hours. When I first watched Bladerunner, and 2001 for that matter, as a teenager, I found it to be mostly boring - lacking as it does, compared to most modern Hollywood Blockbusters, in pacing, action and explosions. When I watched it again in University This movie, much like 2001: A space odyssey, is more an experience or art and philosophy than a great way to be entertained for two hours. When I first watched Bladerunner, and 2001 for that matter, as a teenager, I found it to be mostly boring - lacking as it does, compared to most modern Hollywood Blockbusters, in pacing, action and explosions. When I watched it again in University however, I was truly blown away by it. I've probably watched it over twenty times down the years, and yes it's true, subsequent viewings reveal hidden gems unlike any other movie I've seen. The latest edition on Blue ray is something else. Still current, still relevant, still a work of art. A journey, more than a movie. There, I said it. Expand
  64. DanyT.
    Mar 16, 2008
    10
    I gave 10 because of the original movie that I've seen over 25 times, the director's cut is removing all the mood of the original and slowed down the pace. With the voice over it was so mutch better.
  65. SusanL.
    Mar 1, 2008
    10
    God is in the details. Every time I see this movie, there is a small visual detail which highlights the blurred line between natural and manufactured humans. Although I like the original better than the Director's Cut, it is still Blade Runner.
  66. UnknownJ
    Feb 2, 2008
    4
    some very special effects for a very old film. I watched this movie because I heard this movie is suppose to be a triumph, some people even worship this movie. But to me I thought it was a load of boredom and dullness. I didn't like this not because it was old but it just wasn't my kind of movie and understand the plot and the message and it just seems really dumb to me...there some very special effects for a very old film. I watched this movie because I heard this movie is suppose to be a triumph, some people even worship this movie. But to me I thought it was a load of boredom and dullness. I didn't like this not because it was old but it just wasn't my kind of movie and understand the plot and the message and it just seems really dumb to me...there wasnt anything I enjoyed really in this movie. I can respect that a lot of people like this movie, I however just did not like it. Expand
  67. MarkD.
    Jan 29, 2008
    10
    My favourite movie, bar none (well, maybe the new cut?).
  68. ColR.
    Dec 14, 2007
    10
    The most incredible movie ever. The story is morally deep and doesn't just rely on the action schmooze that we would have expected if this had been taken by a lesser director. Everything in this movie hangs together perfectly - the visualisation of the dark future, the dilution and confusion of cultures into an unrecognisable mess, the bleakness of the fractured progression of The most incredible movie ever. The story is morally deep and doesn't just rely on the action schmooze that we would have expected if this had been taken by a lesser director. Everything in this movie hangs together perfectly - the visualisation of the dark future, the dilution and confusion of cultures into an unrecognisable mess, the bleakness of the fractured progression of different elements of society, the music, the lighting, the acting, everything. There are few movies that can honestly be called "works of art" - indeed, even Scott has never managed anything to the standard of this movie - but rest assured, this film noir masterpiece is one of the most inspiring, beautiful pieces of entertainment that has ever been produced. Staggeringly good. Everything else is a faximilie of this masterwork. The very fact that, in 2007, this film still looks as fresh as it did in 1984 is enough to show how well it was produced. Timeless and utterly stunning. Expand
  69. TiriodB.
    Nov 22, 2007
    10
    This is a classic of the Sci-Fi films, a must seen, the best of its kind without doubt.
  70. DanB.
    Nov 13, 2007
    9
    It's been a while since I saw the original. I was anxious about any new version, but was totally gripped by this one. I never minded the narration in the original (never thought it was bad), but I did not miss it, here. This was my first time seeing it on a big screen and it is still visually inspired, and has aged well.
  71. RD.
    Sep 28, 2007
    10
    Awesome movie. Great visuals. Brilliant performances and direction by Scott. Rutger Hauer is awesome and so is Harrison Ford and Sean Young who looks very pretty. I don't know why did it flop. It is such a class act.
  72. Alicia
    Sep 3, 2007
    1
    Dull. Stale. Uninvolving mess...hopefully this film will be overshadowed, its nothing but a torn, unemotional film with no potential whatsoever.
  73. StephenC.
    Mar 28, 2007
    10
    The fact that major critics are now backpedaling over their initial response to the film show how much their rating really matter. This is a phenomenal movie and most people who know anything about film editing could tel you that it is well composed. This is one of the few films adapted from Philip K. Dick that actually still holds the spirit of the original work. Another good adaptation The fact that major critics are now backpedaling over their initial response to the film show how much their rating really matter. This is a phenomenal movie and most people who know anything about film editing could tel you that it is well composed. This is one of the few films adapted from Philip K. Dick that actually still holds the spirit of the original work. Another good adaptation is "A Scanner Darkly." Expand
  74. JamesR.
    Mar 21, 2007
    6
    The director's cut drastically changes the mood of the film and, in my opinion, not for the better. Most of the Film Noir style of the original has been torn away, resulting in a vague mess that moves at the pace of snail.
  75. BryanH.
    Feb 4, 2007
    10
    Literary, ambient and memorable in the best way. When a film places humanity over human, it supersedes all other competing messages. The atmosphere and passion of this film makes it possibly the best film ever made; certainly the best sci-fi.
  76. HelenM.
    Jan 1, 2007
    10
    I saw this movie when it first came out. Few people were in the theatre. I was mesmerized and stunned by what I was seeing. I am seeing it for the 8th time tonight and I am still stunned by the beauty, the existentialism, the acting. It is truly haunting and as relevant today as it was years ago.
  77. ChrisB
    Dec 13, 2006
    10
    Blade Runner is one of the best movies I've seen, and possibly my favorite science fiction movie of all time. The pacing and complexity can be somewhat confusing for first-timers, but once you look past the visual effects (that still look good, almost 25 years after its original theatrical release) the depth of the story and thematic elements really comes out. This movie has stood Blade Runner is one of the best movies I've seen, and possibly my favorite science fiction movie of all time. The pacing and complexity can be somewhat confusing for first-timers, but once you look past the visual effects (that still look good, almost 25 years after its original theatrical release) the depth of the story and thematic elements really comes out. This movie has stood and will continue to stand the test of time; Ridley's epic. Expand
  78. TomDoe
    Oct 12, 2006
    10
    Not a spelled out movie, with many philosophical and classical literary references and ideas, this film usually leaves viewers polarized. It take more than one viewing to really understand everything and requires the viewer to actually think! Not to say movies can't be wonderful low-brow escapism, but this is not one of those movies.
  79. JohnSmith
    Sep 26, 2006
    0
    The whole idea of cyborgs is just ridiculous. There is to much detail in the storyline, making it difficult to follow. How this movie is rated a top sci fi film I still cannot understand. Someone needs to be shot after that one.
  80. JB
    Aug 11, 2006
    9
    A cleverly dark film that exposes one to visual and cerebral delights.
  81. [Anonymous]
    Nov 18, 2005
    7
    Director's cut is improvement. Instead of dragging on, it allows the movie to envelop you by itself, and focuses more on the main points. I see why critics may call it a classic, but it's too slow and strange for my taste. I prefer the films it influenced (Ghost in the Shell, etc) to the actual masterpiece.
  82. BubbaJack
    Oct 12, 2005
    0
    Thumbs down to the Director's Cut. Adding the dream sequence is just as bad as Lucas adding Greedo's arm or Luke's scream. And deleting the voicerover, it diminshes this film to the point I cannot recommend it to anyone...ever.
  83. RomanR
    Aug 13, 2005
    10
    One of the best Sci-fi out there.
  84. JefferyB.
    Jul 31, 2005
    0
    The Director's Cut is awful. Give me back my dumded-down voice-over! I'm being sarcastic, but that's what fan's of the Director's Cut call the voice over...duming down the movie.. For me, it adds character to the film. It's like a first-person novel..Reminds me of a movie based off a Raymond Chandler story. I like the so-called "cheesy" happy ending. The The Director's Cut is awful. Give me back my dumded-down voice-over! I'm being sarcastic, but that's what fan's of the Director's Cut call the voice over...duming down the movie.. For me, it adds character to the film. It's like a first-person novel..Reminds me of a movie based off a Raymond Chandler story. I like the so-called "cheesy" happy ending. The unicorn dream? Talk about dumbing down....now that sure is a big hint that Deckard's a replicant. I have the international cut on VHS. I'm still waiting for that to come DVD. Heck, the Director's cut didn't even add any new scenes except the dream sequence. This DVD release of one of the greatest sci-fi films of all time is a disgrace. Expand
  85. steveb.
    Jun 27, 2005
    10
    Go with the directors cut. it blows the original cut away.
  86. Mike
    Feb 14, 2005
    10
    This is one of the best sci fi movies! The atmosphere of this movie is unforgetable, more then 20 years have gone by and hollywood sitll hasnt made anything close to this movie.
  87. AkhilK.
    Jan 28, 2005
    10
    Absolutely beautiful. What vision! Truly made my heart ache(and pump!). The direction was incredibly and Harrison Ford at his best!
  88. PatC.
    Jan 7, 2005
    10
    A totally engaging movie. There is no better example of the sustained atmosphere and expressed nuances necessary to make a science fiction movie convincing. Also is a commentary on existence in general, as the greatest films of any genre are. I must point out that the ending in the original version, an introspective set against the remembrance-invoking sudden light and color of A totally engaging movie. There is no better example of the sustained atmosphere and expressed nuances necessary to make a science fiction movie convincing. Also is a commentary on existence in general, as the greatest films of any genre are. I must point out that the ending in the original version, an introspective set against the remembrance-invoking sudden light and color of snow-dusted Glacier National Park scenery, was one for the ages. Evidently Ridley Scott felt he had to implement the literary maxim equivalent that one must be willing to sacrifice one's greatest line for the sake of the poem. I would have left it in. Excessive re-examination clouds the poet's original instincts. Expand
  89. DaveC.
    Oct 28, 2004
    9
    A triumph of hypnotic visuals and special effects. The future dystopia depicted in Blade Runner seems all the more relevent today as Western culture invariably continues to rot thanks to the greed and corruption of capitalism. Blade Runner is first rate sci-fi and it's so unfortunate that they couldn't have gotten a better male lead than the dull Harrison ford. I understand that A triumph of hypnotic visuals and special effects. The future dystopia depicted in Blade Runner seems all the more relevent today as Western culture invariably continues to rot thanks to the greed and corruption of capitalism. Blade Runner is first rate sci-fi and it's so unfortunate that they couldn't have gotten a better male lead than the dull Harrison ford. I understand that the humans in this film are in many ways supposed to appear more robotic than the replicants, but come on, Keanu Reeves resonated more charm in the Matrix. Expand
  90. FlorianB.
    Jul 12, 2004
    10
    This is definitely one of the best Movies of Alltime. Not only under the aspect of SciFi! The only movie I can watch over and over again.
  91. DanC.
    May 3, 2004
    10
    One of the greatest sci/fi films of all time!
  92. MikeN.
    Mar 26, 2004
    6
    Very stylish, but not very interesting. The acting is so understated that nothing lingers at all. Olmos, who hardly says a word, manages to be more interesting than everybody else in the film.
  93. JohnC.
    Mar 19, 2004
    10
    This is one of the greatest movies of all time rendered highly silly by the director's cut. For the love of all that's sacred to pop culture, bring the theatrical release to DVD.
  94. DragoM.
    Jan 17, 2004
    10
    Absolutely fantastic and truly humane!
  95. J.Dodd
    Jan 9, 2004
    10
    "If only you could see what I've seen with your eyes". The best scifi of all time.
  96. NormandJ.
    Sep 23, 2003
    10
    One of the best !
  97. RyanA.
    Sep 19, 2003
    10
    If you fail the Turing Test you can kiss your a-- goodbye.
  98. YoonC.
    Sep 14, 2003
    10
    A film possessed of mythic grandeur, hardboiled noirish stylishness, and visionary sci-fi imagination. The film asks what is and isn't life, what is and isn't true emotions, and ultimately does it matter? The enraged, agonized search for longevity by Rutger Hauer is darkly heroic, and the love scenes between Ford and Young are some of the most subtle, ethereal, and lunar ever A film possessed of mythic grandeur, hardboiled noirish stylishness, and visionary sci-fi imagination. The film asks what is and isn't life, what is and isn't true emotions, and ultimately does it matter? The enraged, agonized search for longevity by Rutger Hauer is darkly heroic, and the love scenes between Ford and Young are some of the most subtle, ethereal, and lunar ever put on screen. Expand
  99. WakeUp,TimeToMulroneycakes
    Jul 22, 2003
    10
    Funny thing: the mighty Phil Dick, having managed to see this film (albeit the earlier, more rubbish version) thought it was a great visualisation of his book. It's not. It's nothing like it. Only the rainy-post-nuclear-earth setting and the names - most of the names, that is -are the same both ways. The only scene that is anywhere similar is the bit where Deckard VKs Rachael Funny thing: the mighty Phil Dick, having managed to see this film (albeit the earlier, more rubbish version) thought it was a great visualisation of his book. It's not. It's nothing like it. Only the rainy-post-nuclear-earth setting and the names - most of the names, that is -are the same both ways. The only scene that is anywhere similar is the bit where Deckard VKs Rachael Tyrell (Rosen in the book - changed so's not to seem Anti-Semitic, like it matters). Even the title's different. There is nothing, not a one thing in the plot of Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? that is carried over to Blade Runner except for the Voigt-Kampff test and the name Roy Baty (and even that got an extra "T"). The book doesn't even have "Reps", it has "Andys" for crying out loud (for android, d'you see?). The great thing is: it really doesn't matter. Blade Runner is one of the best science-fiction films ever made by the hand of man, ever: Ridley Scott directs with the hand of a man who has just been given the world's second largest train set; Harrison Ford is wonderfully weatherbeaten as Deckard - and what happened to Rutger Hauer? He's so completely great in this film that the rest of his career seems abomination. It is a shame that they lost a lot of the baggage from Electric Sheep - Deckard's wife, for example, is a great character, and much missed; the mood-adjustment thingamebob is a great idea, one well worth putting in some other Dick adaptation; and of course the whole Messianic theme that Phil returned to so much is missing too. It's the whole point of the novel - it's got nothing to do with the film. But never mind. Take the movie and the novel as seperate entities, independent from each other. Just as the only people who don't think The Shining is one of the most frightening films ever made are the people who read the book first - it's just that different - so anyone going into Blade Runner with dreams of Electric Sheep in their head will be disappointed. So don't. Expand
  100. SimonD.
    Jun 26, 2003
    6
    I have never managed to sit through this on one showing. It has great FX, a good deal of vision, and Harrison Ford, but it doesn't hold together. It also falls short comapred to the much richer novel, and Scott's "revelation" years later that Deckard was a replicant harms the film in some strange way.
Metascore
89

Universal acclaim - based on 11 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 11
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 11
  3. Negative: 1 out of 11
  1. Reviewed by: Robert Osborne
    Jun 23, 2016
    100
    Blade Runner is a cold, bold, bizarre and mesmerizing futuristic detective thriller that unites the British-born director of Alien with new box-office dynamo Harrison Ford for results that are as impressive as any film that's exploded through a projector so far this year.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.