Not perfect, but outstanding sci-fi adaptation

Rating: 7/10 (1 December 2012)

For whatever reason, its taken me 34 years to make it through this film. This one of those "must sees" during college, from that generation during which the big budget sci-fi epic was coming into its own on the screen. I'd always known this was part of some upper tier of sci-fi filmmaking, along with Brazil, the unfortunate yet still intriguing Dune, and later on, City of Lost Children (and plenty of other things I've since forgotten. You know, short term memory was decimated in my 20s). This is the tier of films made by filmmakers, vs. film studios, Hollywood types and hacks--which were still enjoyable on some other level, but I'm sure I'd have hated films like my beloved Star Wars, had it come out while I was an adult--these films where, yes, there are some arresting visuals, a few, ahem, borrowed plot devices, and lots of whimsical entertainment value, along with loads of tired clichés that really offer us nothing more than entertainment--which is fine when you're six, and maybe beyond.
I was always afraid that Blade Runner just kind of straddled this line between eye-candy and artistry. Plus, I was always watching these films, in college. You know how that goes. You're in some burned bro's dorm room eating pizza, and he's like, "bro, you HAVEN'T SEEN this sci-fi epic/anime/Lebowski? DUDE. Hey, are you gonna pass that thing or not, bro?" This never led to a true appreciation for cinema in one evening.
So, here I am, 15 years later, sober in my mom's basement, like any good liberal arts student. At first, I'm a bit apprehensive. The synthesizers come in, and I immediately scrunch my face up. Oh, poor sci fi synths...still doomed to be an indicator of the short sited 1980's and its desire to seem as future-y as possible, in a New Wavy kind of way. Hell, that Roy guy could have been Sting (so glad he wasn't). And then there's Rachael's New Wave meets 1940's noir look, which took me a minute to process. However, I stuck with this film this time--and part of the reason was that I was finally watching this on a wide screen, which makes all of the difference. The 3 other times I watched this were on older televisions, with that boxy whatever you call it ratio that ruined so many films in their transition to VHS, before we decided that lopping off a 3rd of the picture from sight was sort of insane, like putting your hand over Venus de Milo's head and saying, "oh yeah, I guess that's impressive or something". The visual elements to this film are exceptional, in that they still amaze, and clearly set the groundwork for the next 30 years of sci-fi aesthetics.
And the longer you stick with this film, through the pseudo-noir stuff (luckily this version lacked the much maligned narration--boo-hoo, I had to actually pay attention the whole time, rather than have everything spelled out for me, confusing as it was, at times), the more you will find it to be deeply affecting and poignant in its philosophizing. Of course, knowing this was a story by Philip K. Dick (whom I haven't read much of but really have enjoyed), I went into this film with a certain amount of expectations, concerning the "intelligence" of this movie. And this is one of the slippery slopes of sci-fi film adaptations: how the hell do you cram all of these aspects into 90-120 minutes, without either treating the audience as imbeciles and filling in all of the details via narration or a scrolling text prelude, or worse, omitting some of the very themes and ideas that make the original work enjoyable and important. Obviously, Dune failed miserably (though I thought the aesthetics were everything I'd imagined while reading the novels). I can't attest to Blade Runner vs. Do Androids Dream..., but I can say it was affecting as a stand alone work. I had horrible fears about some of the actors, particularly Roy, who just looks like an 80's cliché, yet in the second half of his film, where the emotional plights of ALL of the characters are really fleshed out in surprising detail for this kind of film, I was completely drawn in. There is enough emotional intelligence in this film that I was surprised that it came out of Hollywood! And I really haven't liked anything else Ridley Scott has done. And I wonder what Scorcese's planned version, if done in the 70's would have looked like! That aside, I'm glad I watched this movie, and without spoilers, I'll say that I was so pleasantly surprised by every facet of this film. Aside from those terrible synthesizers...I mean, they had her playing that melancholic bit on the piano, right during an emotionally tense part...yet they smear those awful synthesizers over it, and almost steer the whole thing into Hollywood melodrama..almost!