Blade Runner Film Review

After the great success that Alien proved to be, Ridley Scott was given a chance to show what he could really do within the Hollywood system. To helm a big project that would make Alien look like a small independent film. Scott was initially approached by Hollywood to adapt Frank Herbert’s massive Science Fiction novel, Dune. However, he would ultimately decline the offer due to personal issues – this instead would be changed by David Lynch in 1984. Scott made the decision instead to suit a different SCI-FI story, ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?’ a novel by renowned author Phillip K. Dick.

Set in the post-apocalyptic “future” of 2019 San Francisco, (changed to Los Angeles in the film), about a bounty hunter named Rick Deckard, tasked with tracking down escaped individuals who are known as ‘replicants’. Synthetic humans with a short life span but aided with advanced strength, created by the Tyrell Corporation. The head replicant Roy Batty leads these few rogue replicants to seek answers by way of terror, about who they are and how they can live longer. Rick Deckard, in pursuing them, falls for a replicant named Rachel, the femme fatale of the story. Who is designed as an emotional carriage for humans but may or may not harbour a genuine emotional connection to Deckard.

The source material and the screenwriters Michael Hampton and David Webb Peoples, explore the themes of identity and whether a synthetic being can live to be something more human. The making of the film proved to be disastrous. Having to work with an entirely different crew than Scott was previously used to, meant different ideas of shooting, resulting in clashes between them and Scott. Lead actor Harrison Ford did work particularly well with him, and when the film finally opened, it received mediocre box-office and damning reviews upon release. Since then Scott has released different versions from the theatrical cut, for VHS and DVD. All of which looked drastically different from the theatrical cut. Which would ultimately prove beneficial as the film went on to be re-assessed now as a cinematic classic.

I saw the Final Cut of the film, and I strangely call it a flawed masterpiece if such a thing were real. The film is gorgeous to behold. The vast setting of futuristic LA is strikingly beautiful, but it does take a step back to the neon-lit streets that Deckard walks through, with rooms consistently shot with spotlights. The story takes a noir direction, with many distinguishable features to identify it. The troubled lead investigating dark streets and alleyways; the femme fatale of Sean Young’s Rachel; the electronic synth score from Vangelis backed by sax cues; the mysterious hidden nature of character motivations. All done with significant effect.

Scott has a great ability to draw the audience into the world that he has created, while we are following Rick Deckard and Roy Batty in their journeys. Harrison Ford provides a compelling noir character portrayal within Deckard, unlikable but exciting enough to follow. Along with Rutger Hauer who is having a fun time playing the sinister Batty – who gives us one of the most visually spectacular and apparently improvised monologues in the rain. Which should rank as one of cinema’s profound film scenes of all time.

The film doesn’t seem to find an equal footing to balance the focus on the relationship between Deckard and Rachel along with the scenes involving Batty and his replicants. This may be due to the compromising of the various versions of the film. But for me, the film’s unique look, dark subject matter and utterly breath-taking pathos overlooked all that and made it a great narrative story and an enthralling experience film. Even until the eventual sequel released in 2018, the debate about whether Deckard is a replicant or not rages on and for me, the truth on the matter should be left to the viewer to experience and debate that themselves. Amongst its fans, including me, the final cut proved to be the best version and a truly visceral and unique vision, flawed but brilliant.

5/5