Blade Runner is a Waste of Time: Siskel & Ebert in 1982

Note: The Blade Runner segment starts at 19:18 mark.

It’s perhaps hard to imagine now, but Ridley Scott’s classic sci-fi film, Blade Runner, saw some hard days when it was first released in 1982. Preview screenings went badly. Crowds flocked instead to see Steven Spielberg’s blockbuster, ET. The film lost money. And critics gave the film mixed reviews.

Case in point, Siskel & Ebert’s review on national television. Roger finds some redeeming qualities – the special effects. Siskel calls it a “waste of time.” One thumb up grudgingly; another firmly down. A decidedly mixed review.

Siskel died, of course, in 1999. If you’re wondering if Ebert ever changed his position, you can find this reappraisal written in 2007, on the 25th anniversary of the film’s release.

Related Content:

Philip K. Dick: A Day In The Afterlife

Ray Bradbury: Literature is the Safety Valve of Civilization


Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare via emailShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrSubmit to StumbleUponSubmit to reddit

by | Permalink | Comments (5) |

Comments (5)
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
  1. blessingx says . . . | August 31, 2011 / 3:48 pm

    It, along with Star Wars, is certainly a contender for generationally overrated.

  2. Jimbob says . . . | August 31, 2011 / 3:57 pm

    Absolutely my favorite SciFi movie of all time. I never tire of watching this film. Definately, Ridley Scott’s masterpiece.

  3. chris says . . . | March 17, 2012 / 7:57 am

    My favourite film of all time,irrespective of genre.

  4. jimjam41 says . . . | August 6, 2012 / 8:36 pm

    Definitely the most excellent sci-futuristic movie of all time!

  5. Rob McMillin says . . . | September 6, 2012 / 3:15 pm

    Blade Runner will prove invincible” wrote Philip K. Dick at the time. He was right — though it would take a substantial amount of revising. The damage done by the Warner company would require substantial repair, which the film wouldn’t get until a working print surfaced in George Lucas’ personal vault and was exhibited at the Cineplex Odeon’s Sunday revival series in 1992. I was in the audience that day, and the friend I attended the screening with wrote a strong letter in praise of the modified film to the Los Angeles Times, which was subsequently printed. Shortly thereafter, Warners rereleased the film on video as a director’s cut, launching a whole new avenue of exploitation for existing titles.

Add a comment

  • Subscribe

    Get updates as soon as they go live, via RSS feed, email and now Twitter!

    Follow on Twitter

    Get the latest from our Twitter Stream.

    Why can't we be friends?

    Suggest a Link

    Got a link we should post? Send it our way!

  • About Us

    Open Culture editor Dan Colman scours the web for the best educational media. He finds the free courses and audio books you need, the language lessons & movies you want, and plenty of enlightenment in between.

  • Advertise on Open Culture

    Open Culture receives about 2.8 million visits per month and has over 275,000 social media and rss followers. Get your message in front of our smart, savvy audience today.

Quantcast