Film Review: Blade Runner (1982)

SYNOPSIS:

“In a cyberpunk vision of the future, man has developed the technology to create replicants, human clones used to serve in the colonies outside Earth but with fixed lifespans. In Los Angeles 2019, Deckard is a Blade Runner, a cop who specialises in terminating replicants. Originally in retirement, he is forced to re-enter the force when six replicants escape from an offworld colony to Earth.” (courtesy IMDB)

REVIEW:

Ridley Scott has been more influential than most other directors of equally limited fantasy output, like David Lynch and Nicolas Roeg, not only because he is more mainstream, but because he did something new in science fiction cinema – he created a genuine feeling of foreignness. He is a master of elaborately different settings, in which places in space or time are not simply sketched-in with a couple of alien-looking artifacts – they are vividly and solidly realised. After Ridley Scott, the design of science fiction films could never be the same again.

Blade Runner (1982) was loosely based on Philip K. Dick‘s classic novel Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? – an almost surrealist story about the relationship between man and machine, appearance and reality, tenderness and cruelty in an entropic future Earth that is slowly going down the toilet, with most of its population emigrated to other planets. The screenplay jettisoned many elements of Dick’s novel, in some cases during shooting, leaving some puzzling sequences. The film, for example, doesn’t make it clear that the rarity of real animal life has led to a thriving trade in robot copies of animals which, in turn, renders baffling the Voight-Kampff tests in which suspected androids are asked about dead animals.

These androids (called replicants in the film) are artificial human slaves who have escaped to revenge themselves on the human race, especially upon the scientist-entrepreneur who created them. Grim, unshaven and Bogart-like, Harrison Ford plays the bounty hunter whose task it is to locate and destroy these dangerous creatures, who have superhuman strength and are highly intelligent.

Over the last three decades there have been several different cuts of the film released, almost as many as Metropolis (1926), but the original release of Blade Runner was cut in such a way that its subtext was almost invisible. I doubt more than one in a hundred viewers understood that Rick Deckard, slayer of androids, may be an android himself without knowing it. He is, like the androids he hunts, curiously deficient in the emotion department. There is a subtle point being expressed here about what actually makes us human, and about destruction making us less human. Unlike so many science fiction films before or since, Blade Runner is quite adult.

Despite various incoherences in the narrative development and an appallingly sentimental scene tacked on by the studio to make it less pessimistic (Deckard drives into the sunset with his android lover), Blade Runner is extraordinary science fiction, its strength is the wonderful fullness of the near-future Los Angeles – crowded, tacky, half-visible through rain and steam, blending high technology with near-universal decay and heavily ‘orientalised’.

Visually the film is enormously exciting, but not in an obvious way. Scott makes heavy use of chiaroscuro – the bizarre sets are shadowy and dimly lit with shafts of light producing unexpected illuminations. Replicants Roy (Rutger Hauer) and Pris (Daryl Hannah) are wonderfully realised too, with two almost-unknown actors as the replicants on the run, with animal-like grace, physical perfection, full of frenetic energy, yet also curiously mechanical and capable of bursting into an oddly inhuman, scarifying violence, with no more visible emotion than a person stepping on an ant. This image is best captured when Pris conceals herself in a room full of life-size clockwork dolls and erupts into a violent attack on Deckard which also happens to be a narcissistic display of gymnastics. It is an uncanny scene. The film may indeed be disturbing for the squeamish, but the violence is unavoidably intrinsic to its central point.

Scott’s masterly direction evokes an alien world which has evolved visibly from our own. Los Angeles is weirdly futuristic yet some sequences are filmed in one of the city’s oldest buildings, Ennis House. Designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, it’s been used in House On Haunted Hill (1959), The Day Of The Locust (1975), The Rocketeer (1991), Cast A Deadly Spell II: Witch Hunt (1994), and Buffy The Vampire Slayer (1992). Scott worked closely with artist Syd Mead to help visualise the details, a well-known industrial designer whose gouache renderings were vividly brought to life by production designer Larry Paull.

Unlike Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979), Blade Runner is more than just a magnificent tale – this time settings and narrative cohere into a striking whole, a film of thoughtful intricate substance, partly sustained by a convincing performance from Harrison Ford. Scott’s sense of both the exotic and the mundane qualities to be found in alien worlds – they are even present in his first film The Duellists (1977) which is, after all, set in the alien world of the past – makes him one of the most creative of all directors. Since I’ve discussed such intellectually stimulating cinema this week, I’m convinced you will show your gratitude by checking in again next week when I treat you to another huge slice of Public Domain pizza with extra clichĂ©s and a very cheesy crust for…Horror News! Toodles!

Blade Runner (1982)

This entry was posted in Cult Films, Film Reviews and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Also, if you like following updates on industry Horror News..
Make sure to subscribe to our RSS Feed!

About Nigel Honeybone

Wee Willie"Nigel Honeybone's debut was as Hamlet's dead father, portraying him as a tall posh skeleton. This triumph was followed in Richard III, as the remains of a young prince which he interpreted as a tall posh skeleton. He began attracting starring roles. Henry VIII was scaled down to suit Honeybone's very personalised view of this famous king. Honeybone suggested that perhaps he really was quite skeletal, quite tall, and quite posh. MacBeth, Shylock and Othello followed, all played as tall, skeletal and posh, respectively. Considering his reputation for playing tall English skeletons, many believed that the real Honeybone inside to be something very different, like a squat hunchback perhaps. Interestingly enough, Honeybone did once play a squat hunchback, but it was as a tall posh skeleton. But he was propelled into the film world when, in Psycho (1960), he wore women's clothing for the very first time. The seed of an idea was planted and, after working with director Ed Wood for five years, he realised the unlimited possibilities of tall posh skeletons who dressed in women's clothing. He went on to wear women's clothing in thirteen major motion pictures, including the Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) and Star Wars (1977), heartbreaking as the remains of Aunt Beru. With the onslaught of special effects came the demise of real actors in these sorts of roles. After modeling for CGI skeletons in Total Recall (1990) and Toys (1992), the only possible step forward for a tall posh skeleton was television, imparting his knowledge and expertise of the arts. As well as writing for the world's best genre news website HORROR NEWS, Nigel Honeybone is currently signed to star in a new series for television presenting the finest examples of B-grade horror. THE SCHLOCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW is seen on Friday nights at 10.30pm on TVS Television Sydney, and where ever good Youtube downloads are available." (Fantales candy wrapper circa 2007)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Articles of Interest from Web