My Blade Runner review

 My Blade Runner review

Intro: This movie puts the saying life is too short into perspective.

Blade Runner: The movie takes place in the future of L.A. in the year 2019. There are bio-androids called replicants that are created to do the work most people won’t do on space colonies. Four advanced replicants rebel, and they go to Earth to look for their creator. Because replicants being on Earth is illegal, a police division called blade runners have to retire them. (by retire I mean kill)

This is one of those movies that I don’t think is bad, I don’t put it in high regard as everyone else does. This is one of the hardest movies for me to review because this film is about the ideas it presents than telling a story. That’s not a bad thing; however, it makes the movie boring due to its lack of action and engaging characters. This leads to another problem I have with the movie, the slow pacing; it doesn’t help the movie either. The movie could have been better if the director focus on the replicant’s dilemma first and what separates them from humans second.

Also, I’m not impressed with how this movie goes about separating humans from the replicants, the movie goes about it by asking them 20 or 35 questions to get an emotional response. I don’t consider this the best method because, first of all, there are things that can dehumanize us, like being subjected to war, slavery, rape, working for the Government, State, or organizations and being alienated by your friends, family or peers. Second, prosecutors do this all the time. Heck, there are religious groups that tell you not to respond emotionally. This is kind of pointless later on in the film because it shows that there are ways around this.

Deckard is a former blade runner who’s a loner. Because he was good at his job, he was brought back to retire the four replicants. What bugs me about him is that the movie drops hints that he could be a replicant. If that’s true, then this could open up a can of worms.

Racheal is an assistant of Eldon Tyrell CEO of the Tyrell corporation. (The company that created the replicants.) She put Deckard in a difficult situation. What bugs me about her is that she doesn’t do much as a supporting character.

Despite Roy, the leader of the rogue replicants, being a ruthless killer in the movie, I do feel sorry for him. He feels like he was ripped off because the replicants have a short life span. I wish this movie was told from his point of view. I have an issue with the replicants, they are better than humans physically, but not mentally, due to their aging the same as humans mentally. If that’s the case, then how can they do labor work if they are not mature enough to do them?

I like the movie’s visuals and the cyberpunk look of the film. I’m also fond of the ending. I can’t get into this without spoiling it. Overall, this movie fell short for me. With that said, I would recommend this if you like noir films.

Ranting = Rental    

My Minority Report review

My Minority Report review 

Intro: Mr. Spielberg (The director of this movie.) dropped the ball on this one.

Minority Report: This movie takes place in the year 2054 a police department called Precrime are arresting people for crimes they will commit in the future. One day one of the officers name John Anderton learns that he will kill someone that he doesn’t know. So he has to avoid precrime and figure out why he’s going to kill the person in question? How in the world was this movie well received and won awards!?! I’m sorry but having the idea of dealing with free will versus predetermination means nothing if the writers don’t do anything with those themes.

That’s one of the many things that bugs me about this movie, preventing crimes isn't the best thing for the movie to do social commentary on. First of all this idea is not new, second the Department of Justice didn't make a big deal about it until six years after the fact. Don't get me wrong just because an idea isn't new that doesn't mean it can't be thought-provoking but that's not the case here. We have one conversation about how precrime is stopping crimes and it’s terrible because precrime doesn’t give us a straight answer. 

Here's an example of how the conversation played out. 

 

Also, it’s missing the human factor, I mean how does the general public feel about Precrime only stopping murders, are the other crimes a big deal to them? Also are they happy that the people who were about to commit the crime are not getting the same punishment as if they committed the crime? Speaking of punishment in order for Precrime to get the information that crimes will happen they have to torture three Psychics, I’m sure the public might feel differently about Precrime if they learn that. The movie does acknowledge how the religious community feel about the three Psychics but the movie could have done more with that. Another thing that hurts this movie is the pacing, it gives the Star Wars prequels a run for its money. Plus, the movie looks bland due to a lack of color palette. 

The movie also has dumb moments in it for explain precrime has John Anderton cornered instead of rushing him they approach him slowly like he's a wild animal, why!?! The mystery of why John is going to kill the person in question wasn’t good because A the reason was foreshadowed and B there are smarter ways for him to avoid him. The only good thing about this movie is the future tech and this movie is almost accurate to the book it's based on. The bottom line is this is not a clever sci-fi movie it’s a chase movie for the most part. I would recommend this if you want a good nap.

Rating = Trash