One of the watershed SF movies

Rating: Null/10 (29 May 2000)

There are a handful of SF flix that, when they hit the theaters, raised the bar for science fiction in cinema against which all others had to be measured: From the Earth to the Moon, Metropolis, King Kong, The Day the Earth Stood Still, 2001: A Space Odyssey (my vote getter for all time most influential and visionary) and Star Wars (begrudgingly said, but has to be acknowledged). I certainly count Blade Runner (and Alien, the predecessor Ridley Scott opus that has to be compared and contrasted) among them.
FTETTM gave us science fiction, Metropolis gave us special effects, King Kong gave us a grand scale, TDTESS gave us a conscience, and 2001 gave us mysticism and a vision beyond our world. Alien gave us one hell of a scare, and Blade Runner gave us alternative art and mystery in so many media. The marriage of film noir and a bleak and grimy FUTURE was a masterstroke, and, I believe, undeniably changed the look and feel of science fiction in all that followed.
Elsewhere the comment is made how Blade Runner is "blown away" by The Matrix. IMHO, The Matrix is a special effects masterpiece that unfortunately fails in most other respects. I also contend that The Matrix never would have been made if it weren't for the vision provided by Ridley Scott in BR.
The ability to marry set design with story line has NEVER been demonstrated better than in BR. The story is so well supported by the setting that it is developed without the need for action or dialog (although both are done superbly). The bleak emptiness of the human condition is magnificently reflected in the cloying closeness of urban decay contracted with the huge empty living spaces occupied by the Tyrell Corporation and the ruined apartment building of the penultimate scenes. That the only true longing for life and beauty is evidenced by androids gives the ultimate expression of the effete condition to which mankind has fallen.
Hey folks, this is art. It ain't pretty, and it ain't what you're used to (or at least what we weren't used to back in '82). But it is a compelling statement which demands a response. Ignore it if you think you can, but I guarantee you it was not ignored by the generation of SF cinema storytellers who have followed.
[Not to belabor the point: but has anyone noticed the eerily similar juxtaposition of movies between Kubrick and Scott that is evident. Kubrick did 2001, A Clockwork Orange, and Barry Lyndon in order, while Scott did The Duellists, Alien and Blade Runner. Coincidence? Probably. But worth a comment, I thought.]