Blade Runner: An Annotated Bibliography Prepared by W. M. Kolb Short items and capsule reviews are quoted in their entirety. Other quotations were selected to emphasize some interesting point and to capture the style and point-of-view of the writer. With the exception of fan-magazines and comics, most items are contained in the Library of Congress and the University of Maryland McKeldin Library/Under- graduate Library collections. Other sources include movie memorabilia stores, comic book dealers and science-fiction conventions. Books, Periodicals and Newspapers Aldiss, Brian W. Trillion Year Spree: The History of Science Fiction. New York: Avon Books, 1988. 274, 334-335. Brief critique. Blade Runner (1982), based on Philip K. Dick's cool novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, was an overheated farrago of SF crossed with private eye machismo and dragged down by pretentious sets. Part of its storyline and at least one of its characters was roped in from another Dick novel, We Can Build You. . . . When Dick's novel was filmed in 1982 by Ridley Scott, its complex story-line was butchered to a single plot-strand of bounty hunter pursuing renegade humanoid robots. While it made effective SF cinema on that simplistic level, it nonethe- less threw away the opportunity of making a brilliant and telling film. Gone was the level of the book which dealt with the moral problem of empathy. Gone were Rick Decard’s [sic] marital problems and his fears about his own authenticity. Gone was the whole question of human worth as something not to be measured in simple IQ terms. Gone was the delicate humor, the sympathetic characterization, and one vital scene where Decard is forced to kill a female android who is the precise double of Rachel [sic], the android woman he loves. In its place was a heavy-handed adventure-packed and sensationalized robot yarn with a tough-guy hero (Harrison Ford) from 1920/Bibliography the school of Marlowe, who wins through and even gets the girl (admittedly artificial—but with all important distinctions ironed out) at the end. Allan, Elkan, ed. A Guide to World Cinema. London: Whittet Books Ltd., 1985. 57. Brief synopsis. | still. Blade Runner presents a future where robots are on the brink of developing human emotions. Harrison Ford plays a bounty hunter who must track down four escaped slave replicants but in doing so falls in love with one, The sets—a sort of wet, steamy Chinatown and a completely deserted block of flats where the robots’ designer lives—are quite staggering, Allliez, Eric and Michel Feher. “Notes on the Sophisticated City.” Trans. David Beriss and Astrid Hustvedt. Zone 1/2, 1986: 40-50. Essay, 3 stills. Itis a spectacle in which the “real” inhabitants of the metropolis are not spectators enjoined (o identify with the actors or the director, but the film's extras . . . the production of more and more sophisticated simulacra imperils the formal distinction between human beings and ‘machines—a potentially dangerous situation until an artificial humanity is implanted into the brains of the replicants, destroying any claim to real humanity they might have. Anderson, George. “A Look at Two New Science-Fiction Movies.” Pittsburgh Post- Gazette, 25 June 1982, pp. 21, 24. Review, 1 still Blade Runner may be the wrong picture at the wrong time. . . . The predominant impression is of wetness. It seems to rain all the time in that futuristic city, and everything is saturated with a clamminess that seeps into your subconscious before the film is over. It's hard to avoid thinking that if only these characters could dry out, maybe their troubles would go away. . . . Basically, however, Blade Runner is simply « particularly unpleasant detective story. . . . Even though Harrison Ford gives his best performance to date, it is done in a losing cause. Blade Runner does not alter a time-honored rule from the Moviegoer's Guide to Survival: “Beware of movies with more than three producers.” Andrews, Rena. “Blade Runner Needs Sharpening.” The Denver Post, 25 June 1982, Weekend: 6. Review, credits, | still. Scott apparently was concerned more with design—imaginative and obviously terribly costly sets and visual gimmicks—and allowed the script’s ideas to become as confused as the Babel-like world of polyglots who roam the streets. While Scott is immensely visual, he doesn’t demonstrate «an ear for dialogue effect nor is he responsive to the complex emotions his actors will have to demonstrate to be believable. As a result, Blade Runner is a film of lost opportunities, There is haunting, blues-like music by Vangelis . . . great special effects, stunning sets and actors who are trying, especially Hauer... . Ford appears aimless and a little tired as the blade runner and even his solitary love scene lacks the passion of the human element. It’s all very sad because -verely flawed movie could have been so much more than it is—a thriller without thrills, a violent, graceless, dark space story an evolved android might have executed better. Amold, Gary. “Future Cop.” The Washington Post, 25 June 1982, sec. C: 1,4. Review, I still. Pictorially stunning. . . . However, this flamboyant attempt by the director of The Duelist and Alien to synthesize an ominous, futuristic setting with the motley clichés of hard-boiled detective fiction is at best a freakish success. ‘The contradictions that plague the movie are apparent from the outset. . . . Invariably overexplicit, the narration tells you more than you want to know and probably need to know, despite the murkiness of certain aspects of the plot. . . . Blade Runner plummets when it contrives its cross-species love story. Dick's framework might be guessed from random illustrative details in Blade Runner, but it’s no longer a controlling factor. ‘The movie might just as well be happening in a future of simultaneous urban decay and hi-tech advancement that evolved without the specific impetus of a global catastrophe. Unfortunately, the loss of this context leaves the filmmakers at a thematic loss. They try to compensate with a dense, brilliant scenic texture, but it still doesn’t compensate for the lost, or at least misplaced, context . Review of Blade Runner. The Washington Post, 30 July 1982, Weekend: 13,17. Capsule review.Bibliography/21 Asahina, Robert. “On Screen: Mixed Effects.” The New Leader, 12-26 July 1982, pp. 19-20, Commentary. The plot consists of [Ford] locating and dispatching four replicants, without any interesting complications. . . . Blade Runner also differs from a film noir in being shot in color, with a visual scheme so murky that it might as well have been black and whi Balio, Tino, ed. The American Film Industry. Madison, WI: The University of Wis- consin Press, 1985. 583. Another technique is designed for those films whose initial box office reception is very mediocre. In the case of Blade Runner, Warner quickly pulled the film from theatrical distribution and then released it through its Warner Amex Satellite Entertainment Network on The Movie Channel and on videocassette for rental or purchase through its Warner Home Video outlets. Baron, Dan. “Blade Runner: Douglas Trumbull Talks About the Special Effects.” Fantastic Films #31 (November 1982); 58-61, 68, 82. Article, 21 stills. Several aspects of production are discussed Basset, Graeme. “Letters.” Starburst, #53 (January 1983): 5. Reader reaction. “Gaff has Deckard's memories because he’s the replicant, not Deckard.” Beene, P. B. “Coming: Blade Runner.” Cinefantastique 10, No. 3 (Winter 1980): 12. “Boasts ‘Heavy Metal’ look, according to Deeley, referring to National Lampoon’ adult fantasy comics.” —_______.. “Blade Runner: A Hot Director and a Big-Name Effects Crew Make this a Project to Watch.” Cinefantastique 10, No. 4 (Spring 1981): 13. 2 stills. ‘The start of shooting is only weeks away for Blade Runner, director Ridley Scott's $15 million science fiction/mystery film, set for a late 1981 release by Filmways Pictures. . . . According to Blade Runner sources, the android-hunt concept of Dick's novel has been retained and strengthened, but “substantial changes” have occurred during preproduction—the dropping of the robot pet subplot, for one to key in on the film's slightly surreal visuals. . . . No cast members have been announced of yet, in advance of a January start at the Burbank Studios. ___. “Coming: Blade Runner inefantastique 11, No. 2 (Fall 1981): 11. 2 story boards, 1 still. “Douglas Trumbull’s new Entertainment Effects Group signed to provide visuals.” Benson, Sheila. “Los Angeles in a Future Tense. sec. VI: 1, 4. Review, 2 stills. Don’t let the words blade runner confuse you into expecting a super-high-speed chase film. Blade crawler might be more like it. . . . In the film’s single most beautiful sequence—inside the Tyrell pyramid, looking out at a golden setting sun—we meet Rachael, Dr. Tyrell’s special assistant and his special pride . . . the film is brilliant in its sleight-of-hand; its amazing surfaces ‘catch us before we notice that the plot doesn’t answer its own questions. If the story is frail and unhelpful, to put it politely, it is certainly drenched in atmosphere. Blade Runner may attract two and three-timers fo savor its inventions. . . . It has the palette and the sense of decadent, controlled clutter of Polaroid artist Maria Cosindas, the necrophiliac chic of photographer Deborah Tuberville. There is something in it of Joseph Cornell's magic boxes and something more of a Vermeer or a Rembrandt still life, It draws on Frank Lloyd Wright and Charles Dickens equally =». The actors, the hardware and the imagination are top drawer . . . but that this much craft and dedication is at the service of such a wafer-thin story is sad. Their magic deserves more than a close examination of people who cannot feel anything—by birth or by design. Los Angeles Times, 25 June 1982, Bensoua, Ben. “Syd Mead Designs the Future.” Fantastic Films, #31 (November 1982): 70-71, 82. Article, 2 illustrations. Bergstrom, Janet. “Androids and Androgyny.” Camera Obscura, No. 15 (Fall 1986):