A director, such as , has experienced the ups and downs of having his films receive poor critical reception, flop at the box office, only to find a devoted cult following years later. For instance, one film that went through this transformation was . This work, often regarded as one of Scott’s most impressive achievements in his lengthy career, serves as a powerful illustration of how a movie’s success is not solely determined by its creators.
During a recent conversation for The Hollywood Reporter, Scott shared an old memory about a critical review of Blade Runner written by Pauline Kael from The New Yorker. To him, this negative critique felt like “industrial espionage.” Interestingly, it wasn’t until a decade later, thanks to some unexpected events in Hollywood, that the film started receiving the recognition it deserved, which Scott humorously referred to as “the madness of Hollywood.
I accused him of industrial spying before the work was even released. He criticized it in The New Yorker, making me very angry. I wrote to the editor asking them to ignore me if they didn’t like my work, but I never got a response. Ten years later, during the Santa Monica Film Festival, they found the film but had lost its negative. A few dedicated fans asked Warner Bros. for a copy, but they couldn’t find one. Instead, they found an old, unfinished version with some Van Gellis and Jerry Goldsmith music. They sent it to the festival without checking it first, and it was shown minus the voiceover. This unexpected screening reignited interest in the film, showing how strange Hollywood can be.
‘Blade Runner’ is a Sci-Fi Masterpiece That Was Saved by Fate
The review Scott mentions appeared in The New Yorker on July 4, 1982, and it wasn’t overly positive about the recently released film. In one section, it states:
Blade Runner, rather than being a suspenseful thriller, seems to suffer from an excess of creative use of hardware, miniatures, and special effects. At some point, it appears that the filmmakers decided that the narrative was secondary; perhaps they were swayed by the powerful, seductive score composed by Vangelis, which seemed to rise from the smoky atmosphere. This score, provided by Vangelis, imbues the movie with such a heavy dose of film noir style that it often clashes with Ridley Scott’s visuals; he tries to chew through it, trample on it, and submerge it.
Absolutely, folks who haven’t fully embraced the original version of the movie might have encountered other renditions, such as the ultimate “Blade Runner: The Final Cut,” which emerged 15 years after Ridley Scott’s Director’s Cut and boasts a 94% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. This version lasts 117 minutes and incorporates numerous alternate, more brutal scenes sourced from international releases, as well as the previously unreleased full unicorn dream sequence.
It’s almost unthinkable now, considering its initial release in 1982, when “Blade Runner” only made $41 million at the box office against a production budget of $30 million. The film has not only left a lasting impact but also spawned an exceptional sequel, “Blade Runner 2049,” directed by Denis Villeneuve in 2017, and is soon to include a limited Prime Video series titled “Blade Runner 2099.” This just serves as a testament that the concept of it being ‘crazy’ barely scratches the surface.
Read More
- Crypto VC funding roundup: Riot snags over $594m, BVNK raises $50m
- PYTH PREDICTION. PYTH cryptocurrency
- The Final ‘Gladiator II’ Trailer Has Arrived
- 15 Charged for converting Drug Cartels’ Cash into Cryptocurrency in U.S.
- OREO Unveils Six New Products for 2025
- ‘Fast and Furious’ Star Paul Walker Remembered 11 Years After His Death
- XRP Price Eyes $2 Support Level Amidst Market Correction
- TROTOAR Gallery Bridges Local and Global Art with ‘That’s What’s Up!’
- IMX PREDICTION. IMX cryptocurrency
- Russell T Davies Says He “Kind Of Hopes” The Streaming Bubble Will “Pop”
2025-01-12 18:33