The review by Michael-albertsen says it all.

Rating: 1/10 (26 June 2012)

I've been a Ridley Scott fan for years. I'll see anything with his name on it, and place "Bladerunner" at the top of my favorites list.
Michael-albertsen's review (with many spoilers) is on target, and I won't waste space being redundant. I will say that the 3-D version of the film is a total waste of money. There was little noticeable 3-D effect - less, even, than the cheesy promo ad for the theater in which we viewed this film. So (a) don't waste your money on the 3-D version, and (b) don't waste your money on this film. Aside from some middle of the road special effects, there is, unlike the majestic "Alien" or "Bladerunner" no character or storyline of any consequence, no scene designed to shock or startle which accomplishes that, and no meaningful philosophical question deeper than a couple stoned guys asking "like where does the universe end, dude?"
Michael-albertsen raises several issues I hadn't considered, and, although his review will spoil the film if you haven't seen it, his assessment that Scott has been on the decline for several years seems accurate.
To me, this film was so deficient, reminiscent of really trashy 1950's sic-fi, that I can't even call it a disappointment. It was a mess.
I'll think twice before assuming that I have to see a Ridley Scott film in the theater; or, for that matter, at all.