Páll Kristinn Jakobsson’s review published on Letterboxd:
This is the fifth time I've seen this film, my third time seeing the Final Cut and the first time I've seen it in an actual cinema (I've seen it once before in a cinema room at my College, but I'm not sure I'd call that a Cinema) and I finally feel like I've come to a conclusion regarding my opinion and thoughts on this film.
The first time I saw it (in the form of the Director's Cut) I absolutely hated it, that was about three or four years ago.
The second time I saw it (the Director's Cut again) I liked parts of it but was still pretty negative towards it.
The third time I watched it I watched the Final Cut and was way more positive towards it, my rating went from 2/5 to 3.5/5.
The fourth time was in the previously mentioned cinema room at College, there the film moved up to 4/5 but that was also around 8 in the morning and I was still half asleep and thus that viewing felt more like a beautiful half remembered dream than an actual viewing experience.
And now on my fifth viewing and first propper cinematic experience with this film I can safely say that I like the film but that my opinion is a weird mix of my previous thoughts of the film.
There is no denying that this film is quite visually stunning and that the score is absolutely breathtaking, but the film is also a mess.
The storytelling is sometimes a bit too vague which leads to confusion over how some scenes connect or what they are even doing in the story to begin with.
The film also feels really underdeveloped and all over the place in regards to it's themes.
The literary references for example feel pretty randomly thrown in there at points and don't really add up to much.
The central themes about our fear of death and our relationship to "god" are developed in really heavy handed ways that lacks subtlety.
But that's mostly down to how terribly written most of the dialogue in the movie is, there are a few good lines here and there but for the most part the dialogue is just too blatantly on the nose and unnatural that it more often than not leads to unintentional laughter in scenes that are suppossed to be serious, deep and contemplative.
But even with it's lack of subtlety, underdeveloped ideas and bad dialogue, it still manages to include some somewhat profound scenes.
Most of those scenes are when the camerawork and swelling score are left to do all the talking instead of the characters.
And I must confess that even though some of themes are pretty underdeveloped and surface level in the film itself, it's still a film that leaves you with enough to think about for you to create the films lacking thematic depth in your own mind in the days after watching it.
Or to simplify that, it's more interesting and profound to think about Blade Runner than it is to watch it.
The acting is also pretty weak and some performances are down right goofy at times, Rutger Hauer being the only actor who is giving a genuinelly great performance despite the poor dialogue he has to work with.
In summary, I don't think it's anywhere near being a masterpiece (it's undeniably a classic tho) thanks to flaws that are mostly the fault of weak writing, but Ridley Scott was still able to turn a weak script into a pretty strong and memorable film by directing the hell out of it.
P.s. That scene where Deckard kisses Rachael is still way too rapey and leaves a sour taste in mouth everytime I see it and seeing that scene in a packed cinema made it almost unbearable to watch.