Blade Runner: What Did Philip K. Dick Think Of Ridley Scott's Epic Sci-Fi Adaptation?

When Ridley Scott's turgid sci-fi odyssey "Blade Runner" was released in theaters in 1982, it notoriously flopped. Despite sporting some striking and groundbreaking visuals, and an appealing film-noir-adjacent dystopian setting, audiences stayed away in droves, perhaps put off by its slow pace, uninvolving characterizations, and ambiguous ending. On a rather high budget of $30 million, "Blade Runner" only earned $41 million at the box office.

In the years that followed, though, people started to flock to "Blade Runner" on home video. The film developed a cult, and then finally reached mainstream audiences. By 1992, enough interest had gathered to warrant a director's cut, and Ridley Scott famously created a 116-minute edit that remains the standard to this day. "Blade Runner" is set the future of 2019 when human-like androids, called Replicants, have proliferated through the public. These Replicants sometimes go rogue, however, requiring a special assassin — a blade runner — to track them down and "retire" them. Harrison Ford plays Rick Deckard, the title character, who has to track down a pair of Replicants played by Rutger Hauer and Darryl Hannah. 

The movie was extrapolated from the 1968 novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" by seminal sci-fi author Philip K. Dick. The book and the movie are very different in both story and tone, so one might wonder what Dick thought of Scott's movie. Thanks to a 1981 letter that Dick wrote to a Warner Bros. exec (handily printed on the author's website), we know his thoughts. Or rather, his speculations. Dick, it should be noted, died a few months before the release of "Blade Runner" in 1982, but he saw a TV report on the film's production, and was impressed. He felt that Scott's movie had the potential to change the sci-fi genre forever. 

The letter in question was written to Jeff Walker, an executive at the Ladd Company. Dick noted in the letter that he saw a report called "Hooray for Hollywood," which featured behind-the-scenes interviews with the cast and crew of "Blade Runner." Dick was moved by the report, and was especially taken by something Harrison Ford had said in regards to "Blade Runner's" genre, writing: 

"...[A]fter listening to Harrison Ford discuss the film, I came to the conclusion that this indeed is not science fiction; it is not fantasy; it is exactly what Harrison said: futurism. The impact of 'Blade Runner' is simply going to be overwhelming, both on the public and on creative people — and, I believe, on science fiction as a field." 

High praise indeed. Because Dick didn't see the final film, he wasn't able to comment on the film's alterations from his original novel, but he was so blown away by the visuals of Scott's upcoming feature, that he already knew it would be a big deal. Dick, it seems, wasn't a fan of modern sci-fi, feeling it too escapist. "Blade Runner" would change that. As he wrote: 

"Since I have been writing and selling science fiction works for thirty years, this is a matter of some importance to me. In all candor, I must say that our field has gradually and steadily been deteriorating for the last few years. Nothing that we have done, individually or collectively, matched 'Blade Runner.' This is not escapism; it is super-realism, so gritty and detailed and authentic and goddam convincing that, well, after the segment I found my normal present-day 'reality' pallid by comparison."

Imagine if he had seen the movie!

Dick continued his effusive praise, saying to Jeff Walker that he and his team had put together what he considered to be "a new form of artistic expression, never before seen." He said that "Blade Runner" had to potential to revolutionize the genre. 

In Dick's view, sci-fi certainly needed a revolution. He summed up his letter by saying that sci-fi "has slowly and ineluctably settled into a monotonous death: it has become inbred, derivative, stale." He doesn't mention "Star Wars" by name, but that seems to be the implication. In 1982, sci-fi had become familiar and uninspired. Dick noted that he was flattered how one of his own world could inspire such potential cinematic greatness. "My life and creative work," he wrote gushingly, "are justified and completed by 'Blade Runner.' Thank you ... and it is going to be one hell of a commercial success. It will prove invincible." 

Dick didn't get to see "Blade Runner" tank at the box office, fortunately. But he also didn't get to see it audience rebuild over time. Dick was incorrect about "Blade Runner" being a hell of a commercial success, but he was correct in saying that it will prove invincible. The visuals of "Blade Runner" went on to form a new standard for sci-fi movies, and its production design remains a turning point in cinema. Indeed, the film grew such a massive audience that Ford returned for a sequel, "Blade Runner 2049," in 2017. Denis Villeneuve directed that film, and he attempted to match Scott's production design in his own idiom. Many feel he succeeded. The "Blade Runner" legacy lives on.