An excellent sci-fi/noir film with transporting atmosphere and a successful explication of its metaphysical premises

Rating: 10/10 (8 November 2000)

This is probably my second favorite science fiction film, after 2001: A Space Oddyssey.
I can see how it may have gotten knocked around critically because it probably went against expectations for Harrison Ford fans, and for sci-fi lovers who prefer the adventure of Star Wars to the introspection of something like this. It doesn't always seem to try to be "entertaining" so much as "enveloping" or "involving." Not much "ride 'em cowboy" stuff here save a few combative scenes.
But I *was* completely enveloped, and I savored this film even the first time I saw it in the late 1980's (on HBO or something like that.) I've seen it several times since and I still love it (even with its occasional editing flaws.) I'll never forget Rutger Hauer's performance, which I think was one of his better ones (or, at least he seemed perfectly suited as the "Roy Batty" character.)
Besides the excellent atmosphere, the film handles its premises regarding aspects of being, consciousness, humanity and mortality quite well. It seeps into your pores as you become involved in the suffocating, oppressive and fascinating landscape. I think this is what film is for, as opposed to simply reading a book. It comes across non-verbally as well as verbally.
I really got a lot out of the interactions between Deckard and Rachel. I also was convinced by Roy Batty's (Rutger Hauer) transformation and his place as the defining throughline of the movie. Although I don't see why the "God of Biomechanics," Tyrell (Joe Turkel) would have such low security so as to be killed by one of what he must know are potentially dangerous creations of his, I was able to suspend disbelief and was very much affected by all of that and it still haunts me from time to time to this day. In a way, there is a side to many of us that might wish to ask the same questions of God (if you think he/she/it exists). "What a thing it is to meet your maker," says Batty.
Appropriately, the most defining scene for me was Batty's monologue near the end: "..all these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain." Hard to believe one could shed tears over science fiction, but I did. Then again, I'm prone to think about such things, but I'm sure this is what the movie was intended to do.
So, this film carefully treads territory that few sci-fi films have or could. Almost all are either adventures or horror movies. This was a dramatic and introspective sci-fi film and although the premises have been dealt with before it handled them with great aplomb. Hey, I like a good adventure like the next person, and I'm a Star Wars fan, too. But you have to know when to shift gears and evaluate something on its own merits. Trying to shove this film into some pre-defined sci-fi box just isn't very fair or very insightful practice. It is a fairly unique effort, and needs to stand alone and apart.
All in all, I thoroughly respect this multilayered, artful, thoughtful and interesting anti-utopian experience.
By the way, the "director's cut" is clearly superior to the "dumbed-down" original version where the studio thought that everything ought to be "explained" to the audience, among other things (like the "happy ending.") They were probably worried that the average (ticket buying) sci-fi fan would need spoon-feeding for such a langorous and contemplative movie. Judging by some of the comments here, they might have been right. But, thankfully, people have come around (maybe the sci-fi fans have grown up?) and we have not only more respect for this film but the director's original vision to enjoy.
I give it 9/10.