Roy: I've done questionable things.
Tyrell: Also extraordinary things. Revel in your time!
Roy: Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you in heaven for.
It is from the movie Blade Runner. I repeated the last sentence to a native speaker, and he said that it is not grammatically correct — it should be "There's nothing," or something like this. Just "nothing" does not suffice.
Best Answer
This is an example of elision: a process of omission of words which are to be inferred by the listener. Elision happens in many languages, and follows certain patterns.
For instance, in English, as in many languages, a brief answer is possible, like this:
In the sentence:
words are elided from the hypothetical sentence "They (= those things that I did) were nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you in heaven for."
By the way, a better preposition in this type of sentence, at least in a more formal setting, would be "into". If there is no complement for the preposition, it is just "in":
But with a complement like "building":
Using "in" for "into" is acceptable, but at the cost of contributing to an informal, conversational tone to the sentence (which is obviously appropriate in the context here). This view is probably due to the the bias arising from everyone having had it drilled into their heads in elementary school that "into" should be preferred.
In any case, that would be the only nitpick I could possibly have with the sentence; not its elided subject and verb. :)