>>I tried! I really really tried! It just couldn’t keep my attention so I shut it down.<<
Try again. It is a film made when the story is the important thing. The “slowness” of it is a specific mood — depressing, introspective, dark, ponderous — this is Decker’s (and everyone’s?) life.
Not Mad Max dystopian but rather spiritually dystopian. Just hang in there and when you are done you will find yourself pondering many aspects of the film for a long time, up to and including questions about life and its meaning.
And pay attention to the cinematography — for a move made in 1982 the ability to portray a future world are beyond amazing.
BR is’t a snob movie — it is just a really good one.
I was going to try again. Need to watch it before I try to watch the new one.
Speaking of portraying a future world it's funny to re-watch Blade Runner and see all the product placements for companies that have since disappeared. Panam, Atari and all the others apparently fought hard to be in that film because they wanted audiences to associate those companies with the future. Now all gone. Apparently a lot of companies were reluctant to have their names associated with the current film for just that reason.
Saw the original Blade Runner in 82’ and several alternate versions (usually a give away the film has problems).
It’s boring, depressing, lifeless, cold and did I write boring. It tries to be a sci-fi film noir mystery but there is no mystery and no surprises. Performances are phoned in, other than Sean Young, who is only in the film for ten-fifteen minutes.
Pay attention to the cinematography? That’s the problem. The film looks good (most Ridley Scott films have that)but there is no soul...I didn’t care about any of these characters, and apparently neither did Harrison Ford, or the audience.