Best movie of this year hands down!

Highly Overrated But Still Good

A lot of fun.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

This is a great movie of a great movie. Ridley Scott is a great director. Dangerous Days captures so much of the original movie. You don't have to understand every shot in the movie just enjoy it. It had a large impact on all the space movies to come. So many later movies copied elements this movie. Very well done.

Personally speaking, the story of how "Blade Runner" was made is just as fascinating as the movie itself. And "Dangerous Days" tells a terrific story. For one thing, it's 3 and-a-half hours long, so "comprehensive" is pretty much a given. And at that length, it's surprising how engaging this thing actually is. Things move pretty well. The filmmakers interviewed nearly everyone involved, and they all had plenty to say. Just about every step and beat of the process is covered here: the struggle to come up with a shooting script, the tensions and grueling work on the set, the disappointing box office failure and subsequent home video rebirth. Just an obscene wealth of material, and Charles de Lauzirika did an impressive job putting it all together. I have no idea how the casual moviegoer would receive this documentary. I imagine it's runtime alone is pretty daunting. But for me, it's a thrill, and a well-produced doc. Maybe it's best left to the more ardent fan, and if that's the case, then this is your rare instance of a studio finally catering to those who have thirsted for new material for many years. And for that, you can color me grateful.9/10

When seeing the original 1982 release at ten years old, I remember it being exciting (since it was the very first rated R movie I saw in the theatres) ominous, and weird. Weird because it wasn't the Indiana Jones/ Han Solo flick that I was secretly expecting; and weird because there was something that compelled me to the film with every viewing. It was something I never talked about to anyone else around me because it just wasn't "cool" to like since it wasn't a box office suck-sess or simply because it was a mature film. The dialogue, the humor and most of the film's themes are just not "Star Wars"-y and black and white. The bad guys are not necessarily that bad, and the good guys aren't all that likable, and the film itself is not riddled with hope like popcorn flicks are. After leaving the theatre, I remember looking at the landscape differently and asking myself just how much believability was in that film. Living in L.A. at the time (since that was the film's location) made me pay even more attention to that idea. Throughout the years, whenever I would see any kinds of urban decay in buildings, I would immediately associate it this film and the impending despair of the future.There were at least 45 minutes of deleted/alternate scenes that were compiled into a mini-film, and turned out to be interesting. Not to the point in where it surpassed the original film, but made you appreciate the finished original film by the end of it. There were also elements sprinkled throughout the outtakes that I remember were original ideas from the writers (namely Hampton Fancher's). Harrison Ford's voice-over narrated and was somewhat clichéd (to the point in where I began to enjoy the original voice-over in the film), and it reminded me of the director's cut of "Superman II" at times (yes, I am a cinegeek, ladies and gentlemen). I've watched this documentary at least four times now and I'm fascinated by it. The sets; the art direction; the actors and their stories: it brings back memories of the summer of '82 and the fall of '92 (when the director's cut was released). It's so inspiring to see thirtysomething filmmakers my age and see how moved by the movie like I was. But yes, I agree- this documentary can be quite boring to those non-fans out there and I don't think this is for everyone. However, the film itself never wowed me to the point in where I thought the film was religion. In the documentary, a fan states that "there are no casual 'Blade Runner' fans out there" before showing off her whole arm encompassed with tattoos of the movie's icons. Well, I have to pleasantly disagree. I think I AM a casual fan BECAUSE I don't riddle my arm in unsightly green and orange hues that's on the same level of those crazed "Star Wars" fans who get the Millennium Falcon or stormtroopers stenciled to their appendages.

The "Making Of" featurettes we see with DVDs sometimes grow into feature-length proportion. "Dangerous Days" takes its name from an early title for the "Blade Runner" movie, and it's beyond feature-length on its own.This is a decent production, and a must-see for fans of the film. However, compared to other Making Of... featurettes, Dangerous Days is over long and might be dull for those who don't fully appreciate the source material.To my mind, "Hearts of Darkness", the Making Of... documentary for "Apocalypse Now" is about the best Making Of... documentary there is. I would also include the full-length Making Of The Abyss as must-see viewing for science-fiction film buffs. Dangerous Days falls short of these.Both "Apocalypse Now" and "The Abyss" featured film-making that went past the edge of human physical endurance. People were risking their lives and sanity to get the films made, and it shows as superior documentary-style drama. "Dangerous Days" mostly shows film-making that goes past the edge of endurance of the film crew for director Ridley Scott, and past the patience of the producers. Yes, it's dramatic, but not nearly as much as Martin Sheen about to get eaten by a ravenous tiger (Hearts Of Darkness) or Mary Elizabeth Mastrantionio nearly drowning at the bottom of a man-made water pit (Making Of The Abyss).I would put Dangerous Days in roughly the same category as the Making Of... featurettes you get with the Star Wars DVDs, except that it is very long.The pieces I found the most interesting were the features with Hampton Fancher and David Peoples, who were rival writers for the Blade Runner script, and the special visual effects segment which shows some of the thought process behind the particular model-making and lighting events in Blade Runner, without being all George-Lucasey in terms of the granularity of explanatory detail. Alternate screen tests also make for interesting viewing.