Blade Runner – Review

blade_runner_xlg-embed

 

I think you all know Blade Runner, a 1982 movie directed by Ridley Scott with Harrison Ford based on the novel Do Androids dream of electric sheep? by Philip K. Dick. The film is set in a distant future: 2019. In this alternative future, Tyrell Corporation has produced robots identical to human beings called Replicants. They are used as

labour force, almost slaves, in the spatial colonies of man. It happens that six Replicants, of the Nexus 6 model, manage to escape and return to the Earth, because they want to find a way to survive, since the Replicants have a predetermined duration. Two die immediately and the other four, on the other hand, manage to reach the earth. Replicants old hunter, or Blade Runner, Rick Deckard, played by Ford, is contacted and forced to capture and kill these androids.

It will be a long review, because I have so many things to say. Many many things to say. This is because – I know that some of you will kill me – Blade Runner has so many mistakes, as well as so many other things beautiful, but so many, maybe too many, problems. So, for the first time, I will not tell you whether I liked the film or not because I don’t know. I take this review to reflect. Since I am divided myself, the review will be divided into what works and what doesn’t.

Let’s start with the most important thing for a movie: the screenplay, written by Hampton Fancher and David Peoples. There are some elements of the screenplay that I liked, especially during the first hour, which is the part of the film I preferred. The dialogues are beautiful, I liked the moment, or rather the moments, of the test “Voight-Kampff”, a test that is able to recognize the Replicants, and the dialogue between Deckard and Tyrell, it is really well written. The noir look is also nice, so the hunter’s hunt for Replicants (the moment when he enlarges the photo is really nice). In addition, we also have a double point of view, since we also follow the events of Roy, the strongest Replicant of the four, who tries to find Tyrell because he wants to find a way not to die. Finally, the issues addressed are many important. I am actually of the opinion that it deals only with one issue and that others are only included and not treated. The central theme is humanity and revolves around a question that the viewer must ask himself: what is really human and what is not? In this film we have an almost aseptic human population, aimed only at money; instead the Replicants seem human. They are very interested in people, photographs and emotions, so much that after a short while they also begin to experience them. We see robots in love, machines that feel real feelings and man not. And it is important, since the test that recognizes Replicants is based on emotions and eyes, which are the mirror of the soul. A thing that struck me a lot. Therefore, the whole film leads us to think that it is unfair to kill and exploit the Replicants as slaves (we are often told that they live in terror), that it is not human, because they are living beings too. The other themes, which for me are not dealt with but only included, are: cloning, globalization and genetics. For now, I have done with the screenplay, but I’ll take it again later.

Other very positive aspects are the scenography and visual/special effects. Even if in some places you can see that something is created artificially, you have to recognize that it was the’ 80s, chapeau. For these two aspects, it also had its two Oscar nominations and for the production design it won the BAFTA. Another thing that I would have recognized is the sound editing. The noise of the machines, city, gun, even the machine that he uses to enlarge the photo. In short, everything is perfect and created impeccably.

These are all the strengths of this film and, objectively, nobody can deny them, but you cannot deny the many problems this film has.

First of all, the big narrative holes and inconsistencies. Yes, guys, there are big holes. I know very well that now someone is going to kill me, but that is the case and you cannot deny it. The first hour of the film is good, it’s a science fiction noir that takes you, you’re interested, for sixty minutes. From now on, then in the remaining forty-five minutes, the film deviates on the action and there is a considerable change, precisely in terms of timing. While in the first part of the movie, things pass as they should, that is, everything takes its time (but it’s NOT SLOW!), in the second part everything happened quickly. Just think that in only those forty-five minutes, Deckard ran into all four Replicants who fled one after the other. What I personally hate in films. It seems that everything happens in one night and maybe it’s like that, idk. There is not even a precise definition of time. A great mistake in both script and directorial. A large narrative hole is represented by Replicants. The first shot in the movie is a black screen with a scrolling upwards text (a copy of Star Wars) that explains to us that the Replicants are designed to be sent to these colonies. So, from what it seems, they have no contact with the Earth, since it is absolutely forbidden for them to be on the planet. But that is not the case at all. In fact, a Replicant has one hotel and another one a job. How is this possible? This is a serious narrative hole that also undermines the entire first part of the film and it is not attributable to Philip K. Dick. This is because you just need to read the plots to understand how the film is different from the book. In fact, the author himself had refused to adapt Blade Runner’s film into a novel because he did not believe that he was artistically suitable for him. Here are just the film’s plot holes. Another big narrative problem is the construction of this Replicant which is Roy. He is represented in the film in a certain way and at the end of it.. he becomes someone else. WTF? It keeps the spectator confused, very confused. As well as the ending, of which I understood the meaning, but damn, there is a way of writing things. For an entire film, Roy repeats “I’ve seen things”,”I’ve done things” and afterwards he says two of them, just to give the sop and say “toh, we told you what he saw”. No, you have not told me that. Another hole as big as a house. I don’t think that the screenwriters knew what Roy had seen, and in the end they invented two bullshits to close the film. In general, the whole second part is badly written, it almost seems as if they had been tired of writing this film and said: “let’s finish it in a hurry”. That was the case. Another thing I didn’t like was this love story, too many teenage, almost babyish. But the second part is childish, as if it really changed the target of the film. So no longer adults, but children and youngsters.

And these are the problems that affect the screenplay. But there are other things in the film that are just bad. The sound. Absolutely horrible. But not just for the music, but for the use they made of it. There’s too much music when it’s not needed, especially in an initial piece, where they talked, but you couldn’t understand what they were saying; and little, or nothing, when it would be useful. In a chase, which was too long, there was nothing at all.

Small spoiler, if you do not want to read it, skip this paragraph. In addition, in this scene, the effect is not the best. In fact, there is a shooting shoot, more precisely Deckard shoots at the back of a Replicant and always strikes on the same shoulder, but when approaching, both shoulders have a bullet hole. Magic.

I think that all this is due to the wrong effects (only chance, I still have the idea that they have done an overtime job), a poor editing and a director who knows nothing. Yes, I don’t like Ridley Scott, in the sense that I don’t think it’s this big record. Although it’s actually improved by Blade Runner, for me, it’s still a mediocre director. So the other big weakness is direction. Scott is reckless and kayakar. In the sense that he doesn’t try to cure his film, it’s very wrong. In fact, in my opinion, the action scenes are not shot very well. Only one. Then, the costumes. The film is set almost forty years in the future compared to production and people dress exactly as in the 1980s. What? What kind of mind would you think that clothing does not change in forty years? Even Back to the Future dressers did that. And this is precisely the menefreghism. Invent anything, strange clothes, but if a character is dressed like the’ 80s, I put him in the’ 80s. And from here you can understand why there are so many shots of the city, sometimes useless. They really serve to remind people that they are in 2019 and not 1980, since many other things say the opposite: the polaroid, Deckard’s apartment, his gun. Without offense, but have the men managed to design robots similar to them, but not a new camera or a new gun type? I do not believe that. That’s why I never really felt like the movie is set in 2019. For me it was as if the film was set in the 1980s with the question: and if men had invented robots in these years? So a kind of badly done stempunk.

Last thing the actors. Great Harrison Ford and Rutger Hauer. Daryl Hannah is also very good.

Well, I said everything. I have said so much. I hope you are not bored. Now, only the vote is missing. And it will be very difficult! But before the vote, however, there were some small reflections. Do I recommend it to you? Good question. It’s not a very bad movie, but it’s not even a beautiful film. As I told you, it has many mistakes, too many. However, see it, try to focus only on the beautiful message, on the beautiful theme and enough. Do not have high expectations. I didn’t really even have it, but I was still disappointed.

Obviously, I think everyone knows that in just over a week’s time, on October 5th, Blade Runner 2049, the sequel to this film will be released. I am really curious, so I’ll probably go to see him. Maybe, although from the trailer does not seem, they have done a better job than the original. Who knows.

Rating: 56/100

Sorry, I could not give more. I invite you to comment for whatever you say, it is a film I want to discuss. If you liked the review, click like and share on all your social media and, I recommend, follow the blog. If you don’t have a wordpress account, you can follow it with the email or facebook page, which you will find on the side of this review. Thank you and the next, if I survive.