Subject: REVIEW: BLADE RUNNER--THE DIRECTOR'S CUT

From: [email-masked]
Date: 18 Sep 92 13:20:43 GMT

[Followups directed to rec.arts.sf.movies.  -Moderator]

		       BLADE RUNNER--THE DIRECTOR'S CUT
		       A film review by Sarah M. Elkins
			Copyright 1992 Sarah M. Elkins

BLADE RUNNER--THE DIRECTOR'S CUT:  First there was David Lean's LAWRENCE
OF ARABIA, then Stanley Kubrick's SPARTACUS, and now Ridley Scott's
science fiction cult classic BLADE RUNNER has been restored to the
director's original vision of the movie and the new version released on
its own to theaters.  As with the previous version, it can be taken
simply as a stylish, futuristic detective/action flick, or an
exploration into what it is to be human (those interested in the latter
might also wish to read Philip K. Dick's DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC
SHEEP, on which both versions were based).

Plot/kick-off:	In the near future, some Nexus 6 replicants (sort of robots,
difficult to tell from humans) escape and try to hide in Earth's grimy
21st-century society while their leader, Roy Batty, looks for a way to
"live" past their predesigned life spans.  Deckard, a retired Nexus 6
hunter, is coerced into tracking them down to kill them.  Good pacing,
interesting detective work: contrary to the previous version, I was
able to follow the action this time, since more transition scenes were
included (it didn't seem random this time) and the annoying voice-over
narration was cut.  I'd rather be shown than told, and this version did
a much better job of that.

Characters/acting:  Harrison Ford plays Deckard, a beaten-down man who
doesn't like his job but doesn't seem to have much of a choice, and is
smart at what he does.  Rutger Hauer is weird but compelling as Roy, and
his last scene in the movie is amazing.  Sean Young is beautiful and
stiff as the beautiful and stiff Rachel, who is drawn to Deckard.
Others include Darryl Hannah and other replicants, and Edward James
Olmos as one of the other officers of the law.  Which characters are
really the more "human" ones?  You decide.

Cinematography/FX:  This movie is worth seeing for its cinematography
alone, especially on the big screen.  The city is futuristic not so much
through new fantastic technology (though there were aircars flying
through the city, sometimes the viewers "flew" with them around
buildings and giant TV billboards), but through the small changes in
everyday objects.  New scenes were added in of the city in the early
parts of the movie, which helped give more of a "feel" to get the viewer
into what was going on in the movie earlier.

Score/Sound:  Vangelis, synthesized, but also some sax, I liked it and
it fit the movie.

Violence/Gore:  Bullet holes in bodies, crushed heads, finger-breaking,
fights/shootings.  Pretty violent, but not a gorefest, no slow-mo fights
or lingering shots of gore.

Language:  Probably some.

Skin/situations:  Kissing, fairly short breast shot.

Analysis:  It's been at least a couple of years since I saw the previous
vision, but I thought this version was great, partly because it was my
first time seeing it on the big screen for either version.  Some people
might prefer the previous, slightly happier, version, but I think this
is the superior version.  I recommend it to fans of the old, and even
more to those who've never seen either version.