Why do you think Blade Runner is a cult film?

[Rodders]

I wonder if they were explored in Jeter's sequels?

I don't think they were. I remember them being based in Los Angeles.

 

[Rodders]

It's just so awesome and ages well. I wish I hadn't of sold off my blu ray collection as this was one of them. It has some great lines in it too.

Blade Runner was just one of those films where everything came together. PKD'd basic premise, the Visionary direction of Ridley Scott, Great casting, Technical expertease of Syd Mead and Vangelis's inspried soundtrack.

 

[ynneBBenny]

Im not sure why it's a cult film but can I say why I liked / like it. I think the music by Vangelis had a large subtle influence on the mood of the film, probably more so that is given credit for.
The film had a certain classiness about it. It's effects were amazing for the time and yet not in ya face. Done tastefully.
The concepts were strong and some of the futuristic scenery was beautiful.
Racheal was pretty and as a long lad I would have loved to hop into her
All up a great film

 

[Brian G Turner]

Agreed, and welcome to chronicles, ynneBBenny.

I wouldn't describe Bladerunner as a cult film - simply a classic.

 

[Foxbat]

Im not sure why it's a cult film but can I say why I liked / like it. I think the music by Vangelis had a large subtle influence on the mood of the film, probably more so that is given credit for.
The film had a certain classiness about it. It's effects were amazing for the time and yet not in ya face. Done tastefully.
The concepts were strong and some of the futuristic scenery was beautiful.
Racheal was pretty and as a long lad I would have loved to hop into her
All up a great film

There was a recent series on BBC 4 about music in films. One small part was on Vangelis where he discusses his use of sound in Blade Runner. It was most interesting

 

[lauren$77]

Racheal was pretty and as a long lad I would have loved to hop into her

I can't believe you just said that!!!! maybe I'm interpreting you wrong - I hope

I recently just watched this film, and was really disappointed as I remembered it so much better. Yes the world effects were really amazing for its day, but the pace of the film was slow, and I found the prolonged close ups of Harrison Ford's face as he looked bored out of his brains really weird.

 

[JoanDrake]

It's just so awesome and ages well. I wish I hadn't of sold off my blu ray collection as this was one of them. It has some great lines in it too.

My understanding is that "tears in rain" was improvised by Hauer. Good job if true, I've seen whole novels with that title.

My only problem with it was that it was set in 2019. Now, even given that it was made in 1982, having interplanetary travel and artificial humans in just 40 years seems a bit much. Still, all SF does that really; and the part where Deckard was talking to his computer as he analysed the picture was about spot on to what actually can be done today.

But the part I truly loved was when Deckard was talking to Gaff and all these futuristic cars were going by behind the Origami man, and then, a 1967 Chrysler Imperial slides past. Truly great, because it really fit right in.

Truly, a Classic film.

 

[Reivax26]

It's in my top 10 all time. People would probably be shocked by what is my number 1.

 

[HanaBi]

I recall seeing this at the cinema way back in 1983, and feeling well & truly underwhelmed, albeit for the visuals.

I will admit, this came on the back of watching 'The Return of the Jedi' a few weeks early, which I thought was the least interesting of the SW trilogy at the time, but still stood head & shoulders of Blade Runner (and as for that voice-over!!!)

But like any good wine left to stand for a few years, the film turned out to be a vintage experience - and even though there are about 4 or 5 different flavours of the movie, I still find it one of the most emotional experiences I've ever seen: helped greatly in advances with the sound & picture quality. Vangelis' music has never been bettered; and those visuals are still outstanding, some 30 odd years on.

But I think what capped it off was Hauer's 'Time to Die' requiem: a wonderful scene that complimented the violent & dystopian vision of our future world so well.

 

[althea]

I have watched this film several times and will watch it several times more.
I am flabbergasted to find out many people do not like it.
Rutger Hauer was wonderful and perfect for the part.
The whole undercurrent of tension and fear lends the plot an extra oomph.
The story is peppered with so many little gems,it is definitely a classic for all time(in my opinion.)

 

[HanaBi]

I have watched this film several times and will watch it several times more.
I am flabbergasted to find out many people do not like it

But it would be interesting to know how many of those people who originally disliked it (myself included), went on to become great admirers of the film years later?

Ordinarily, when I watch a movie and dislike it, I never bother with it ever again. But for whatever reason, I gave Blade Runner a second chance years later - probably because the latter version had been re-edited with a different ending and no voice-over - two pet hates of the original version now excised.

So with that in mind, I watched it again, and grew to love it and appreciate it. I suspect quite a lot of people of the same original opinion were of the same mind with the latter cuts.

 

[althea]

We are likely to change our minds about things as get older.
I hated sprouts as a child and I love them now.

 

[HanaBi]

We are likely to change our minds about things as get older.
I hated sprouts as a child and I love them now.

I would agree with your first sentence; but as for sprouts!! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[mgilmour]

I remember seeing this movie with a group and I was the only one that loved it. I didn't mind the slow pacing....it seemed to add to the overall impact. I still watch it regularly to refresh the experience.

Yes, the last seen with Haur was completely improvised.

I collect movie soundtracks (preferably instrumental) and I find that I keep on going back to eclectic nature of bladerunner.

 

[althea]

It's in my top 10 all time. People would probably be shocked by what is my number 1.

Come on Reivax,Tell us what your number one film is!

 

[althea]

I have just acquired Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.Yayyyyyyyyyyy!!!

 

[Reivax26]

Actually my favorite movie of all time is 12 Angry Men, the original with Henry Fonda. There is no action, no endless swearing and yet it held my attention for the entire movie. It did this through damn good acting by all the people in the room.

1. 12 Angry Men
2. Shawshank Redemption
3. The Godfather
4. Pulp Fiction
5. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
6. Gladiator
7. Monty Python and the Holy Grail
8. Star Wars
9. Blade Runner
10. Animal House

 

[Rodders]

It is a great movie.

 

[Fueggo]

I would say the atmosphere the movie had, from the sets to the dialog. It all comes together to make this future-noir flick.

Rutger Hauer was amazing in it too.

 

[Anthony G Williams]

An extract from my SFF blog: http://sciencefictionfantasy.blogspot.co.uk/

Blade Runner is one of the most famous SF movies ever made, but I had only seen the original 1982 cinema version, and that a long time ago. Several different versions have been made but in only one of them did director Ridley Scott have complete artistic freedom – The Final Cut, released in 2007 – so when it came up on TV I was keen to watch it.

I'm sure I needn't say much about the plot, concerning the efforts of a specialist police officer (Bladerunner) in a future Los Angeles to identify, track and "retire" (kill) four replicants; very tough and strong artificial humans made for work in outer space who have illegally returned to Earth in the hope of extending their artificially short lives. The four most important characters in the film are the Bladerunner Deckard (Harrison Ford), two of the replicants he is hunting (Rutger Hauer in a compelling performance, and Darryl Hannah) and a young woman who also turns out to be a replicant (Sean Young).

The setting is dystopian, with Los Angeles a grim, dark, dirty, violent and decidedly wet place (most of the scenes seem to be set at night, in the rain). The mood is enhanced by the soundtrack, with strange mechanical noises from the city frequently intruding into the futuristic background music from Vangelis. The most noticeable difference between The Final Cut and the original is the deletion of the explanatory voice-over from the protagonist Deckard; a big improvement in my view, as it adds to the bleak, mysterious atmosphere of the film. Little is explicit and the viewer has to focus to keep up with the often fast-moving action, but time is taken to give some depth to the major characters, and some of the minor ones too. The fact that the replicants are treated with some sympathy adds to an air of moral ambiguity; this is definitely a film for adults to appreciate, in a way that few SF films have been (Gattaca being another example).

The original release should certainly feature in anyone's list of best SF films; The Final Cut is vying for the top spot. Compared with another good SF film seen recently – Interstellar – it lacks the ambitious plot and spectacular visuals, but as a piece of filmic drama it is clearly superior. Any SF fan who has not seen this film should certainly do so, and try to see The Final Cut if you can.

A final thought: the film is set in 2019, which in 1982 was presumably felt to be far enough into the future for interstellar colonisation to be feasible. It is rather sad, but typical of SF, that this optimistic assumption was so far from reality that we are in fact further from achieving that now than we seemed to be in 1982. Yet the IT visible in the film was far less advanced than ours – which just emphasises how difficult it is to predict technological developments.