More than just a box office flop that resurrected itself in the midnight movie circuit, Blade Runner (1982) achieved extraordinary cult status through video, laserdisc, and a five-disc DVD collector's set. Blade Runner has become a network of variant texts and fan speculations—a franchise created around just one film. Some have dubbed the movie "classroom cult" for its participation in academic debates, while others have termed it "meta-cult," in line with the work of Umberto Eco. The film has also been called "design cult," thanks to Ridley Scott's brilliant creation of a Los Angeles in 2019, the graphics and props of which have been recreated by devoted fans. Blade Runner tests the limits of this authenticity and artificiality, challenging the reader to differentiate between classic and flop, margin and mainstream, true cult and its replicants.
Sean Redmond excavates the many significances of the film -- its breakthrough use of special effects as a narrative tool; its revolutionary representation of the future city; its treatment of racial and sexual politics; and its unique status as a text whose meaning was fundamentally altered in its re-released Director’s Cut form, then further revised in a Final Cut in 2007, and what this means in an institutional context
A short little book on film theory analyzing Blade Runner at several levels. It doesn't really go into a lot of detail about the production of the film, but there are other sources for that, which are included in a really nifty bibliography at the end.
What this book does well is consider the social politics and meanings behind the film, as well as how it got and retained its cult status as one of the great science fiction movie masterpieces. In doing that he focuses on questions of gender, race, attitudes to technology in ways that are quite insightful.
You can tell that Redmond is not only an academic film writer but also a fan of Blade Runner, so there is clearly an attempt to see the best possible meaning in the film, which sometimes might seem slightly disingenuous, but he is good at defending the film and his point of view. An entertaining read.