Ridley Scott recently rewatched his 1982 classic “Blade Runner” for the first time in over 20 years, and it turns out that he has a very strong opinion about haters of his iconic sci-fi film.
Speaking with Total Film, Scott talked about the film’s “monumental, five-month, day-by-day evolution” and the hard experience of filming the movie. However, more entertainingly, Scott also took a shot at those who had initially dismissed “Blade Runner” back in the day, and others who still do today:
I hadn’t seen ‘Blade Runner’ for 20 years. Really. But I just watched it. And it’s not slow. The information coming at you is so original and interesting, talking about biological creations, and mining off-world, which, in those days, they said was silly. I say, ‘Go f— yourself.'
In the interview, he also reveals his utter dismay at legendary film critic Pauline Kael’s four-page review of the movie in which she “destroyed” it. Scott took the criticisms seriously:
“I was so crushed. I had a hard time making it, and yet I thought I delivered something special. And then to have it killed … It actually affected the release of the movie. I took the four pages and I framed them on the wall of my office. They’re still there today because there’s a lesson in that, which is: ‘When you think you’ve got it, you don’t know s—.'”
When it comes to sci-fi classics, it's very hard not to include Ridley Scott's "Blade Runner." Not only did it massively under-perform at the box office, but it also failed to impress critics. It’s not hard to see why critics could be polarized by this film.
At the time, in 1982, its production values were mentioned as a positive, but the consensus seemed to be that it just wasn't the action film that was being advertised in the trailers. Instead, Ridley Scott's film turned out to be a slow-moving, meditative sci-fi noir on what it meant to be human.
Eventually Scott’s director’s cut had audiences and critics re-evaluating the film. Since its release, "Blade Runner" has gone on to be crowned as one of the most important and best sci-fi films ever made. Although it had initially left me cold, I’ve seen it around half a dozen times since and there’s always new things to discover.
I wasn’t part of the camp that thought "Blade Runner" was a great movie but, over the years, I've built appreciation for the film, despite its somewhat distancing effect. My history with the film is unique and unlike any other I've had. Its images, simmering with Jordan Cronenweth’s all-timer cinematography, recalled those of the great 18th century paintings.
The special effects, even by today’s standards, are absolutely stunning as the film rummages through a desolate but high-tech futuristic Los Angeles condemned by social and class warfare.
The 1% has won, they live atop the grandest of towers, with skyline views that take your breath away, and the poor are all shacked up either in claustrophobic apartments, or the slummy L.A. streets overcrowded with what seem to be a primarily Japanese, Arabic and Caucasian population.
The American Society of photographers named it the ninth best photographed film since 1950. Our 1980s critics poll had “Blade Runner” finishing as the sixth best movie of that decade.