TheRetroCritic

Review available on the new website .

Before Blade Runner enjoyed a revival with a Director's Cut released 10 years after its original release in 1982, it was nowhere near the masterpiece it is now recognised to be. The film underperformed at the box-office, its more optimistic take not resonating with audiences. Indeed, this is the only version of the film with a happy ending of sorts as Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) and replicant love interest Rachael (Sean Young) leave Los Angeles together after fellow Blade Runner Gaff (Edward James Olmos) spares her life. The infamous voice-over unconvincingly explains to us that Gaff just assumed she would only live for 4 years but luckily Tyrell told Deckard otherwise off-camera. Most people, including Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford, would agree that this voice-over, which pops up pretty randomly and abruptly, sometimes stating the blindingly obvious, was a mistake. Its content, delivery and placement just don't work. It constantly interrupts Vangelis' beautiful sco

Review now available on the new website . 

And so a franchise that died soon after it started continues and ends with an instalment that may not be the worst of the bunch but which is still hardly impressive or necessary. Luckily, it learns a little bit from Dracula II: Ascension 's mistakes. For one thing, the main characters this time are Jason Scott Lee's badass priest and Jason London's jokey sidekick. That's a good thing. We follow these two as they fight off vampires on stilts and say unintentionally hilarious things like "You don't bless babies.". It's not great art but it just about kinda works. At least the film is trying to be somewhat fun and entertaining, which is more than I can say about its predecessor. Unfortunately, way too much time is spent waiting for the vampires to come out. So many scenes take place during the day when all our heroes can really do is spout out exposition and prepare for whatever's going to take place later. It's not terribly interesting and j

Famously a flop upon its initial 1982 release, Ridley Scott's  Blade Runner was based on Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? and, although it was rather different from the book in many ways, it captured the look, feel and spirit of the writer's dystopian future. The Director's Cut , released 10 years later, removed the voice-over, shortened the ending and hinted at the main character's true nature. Although some did miss the extra touch of noir the voice-over provided, it's frankly not necessary looking back plus Ford's monotonous read takes away from the stunning visuals. As for the twist ending, I'm not saying it makes perfect sense and far surpasses the original's optimistic take but it certainly makes more of an impact dramatically. Neither ending truly "gets" Philip K. Dick's point but for the film specifically, The Director's Cut feels more appropriate. Visually, this movie looks amazing: the city