Good, but flawed (and dated)

Rating: 7/10 (2 March 2006)

(ATTENTION: SPOILERS) Blade Runner is a good film; I gave it 7/10. If I was around in 1982, I probably would have been blown away and thought it was the best thing I'd ever seen. But since I'm pretty young, I've been jaded by many other sci-fi masterpieces. I saw Blade Runner for the first time only a few years ago.
Here are the positives: Brilliant cinematography, thought-provoking subject matter, great special effects (for 1982), a haunting score (the scene where Deckard shoots the chick replicant in the clear raincoat is seared in my memory), rich set design, and adequate acting.
Here are some negatives: Very slow pace (yes, I have been too affected today's films), completely unbelievable scientific advancements (especially for 2019), and bad sound effects. I had a hard time buying into the whole interrogation of replicants. If they're man-made "organisms," there has to be an easier way to distinguish them (maybe a DNA test or something). I also had a hard time believing that Deckard and Rachel were in love. That part of the story was lacking.
Other films since Blade Runner (like Bicentennial Man and A.I.) have dealt with the same philosophical questions about the meaning of life and at what point does a "robot" become a person. I'm not saying that the two films I mentioned were better (cuz I'd get torn a new one) but I saw them before I saw Blade Runner and thus had already been exposed to the "cyberpunk" world and its philosophical questions.
Anyway, that's my abridged opinion.